CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

openspec-explore

Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change.

64

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/openspec-explore/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content delivers a clear, well-structured stance with concrete CLI commands and a useful capture table, scoring well on actionability and organization. Its weakness is verbosity — repeated guardrails and large illustrative blocks inflate the token budget.

Suggestions

Consolidate the 'Don't implement' rule: state it once in the opening and remove the duplicate 'Don't implement' entry from the Guardrails section to cut tokens.

Trim the large generic ASCII art example under 'Visualize' to one small representative diagram, keeping the stance point without the padding.

Consider folding 'What You Don't Have To Do' into 'The Stance' or removing it, since its points are largely the inverse of already-stated guidance.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient but carries noticeable padding — a large illustrative ASCII diagram block, a 'What You Don't Have To Do' section, and 'Don't implement' restated in Guardrails after the opening — that could be tightened without losing clarity; it is not a 2 because the prose itself assumes Claude's intelligence rather than over-explaining basics.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete executable commands ('openspec list --json', 'openspec status --change "<name>" --json', 'openspec store list --json', '--store <id>') and a specific insight-to-artifact capture table with example offers; minor gaps (no full status JSON schema walkthrough) keep it just below 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Explicitly framed as a stance rather than a fixed workflow, yet the 'When a change exists' path is a clear numbered sequence (resolve/read artifacts, reference naturally, offer to capture, user decides); no destructive/batch validation is required here, so the cap does not apply, but the deliberately open-ended structure leaves some checkpoints implicit rather than a clean 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, but the single SKILL.md is well-organized into clearly headed sections (Stance, What You Might Do, OpenSpec Awareness, Guardrails) with no nested references and easy navigation; it is not a 5 only because the body runs long (~280 lines) with inline example dialogues that, while useful, make the overview less lean than the anchor ideal.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with natural trigger terms and a distinct niche. Its main weakness is that the named actions are somewhat abstract rather than fully concrete.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific actions ('exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements') anchored to a concrete domain (a thinking partner in explore mode), with only minor abstraction gaps; not a comprehensive 5 because the actions remain somewhat high-level rather than fully concrete.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' ('a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements') and 'when' ('Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would say are present ('think through something', 'explore ideas', 'investigate problems', 'clarify requirements', 'before or during a change'), giving good keyword coverage; a few common synonyms or shorthand variants are missing, keeping it just below 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'explore mode' / 'thinking partner' niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers, but 'think through something' is broad enough to risk minor overlap with general conversational or other OpenSpec skills, so it is not a clean 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
behindthedash/worktrail
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.