CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

worktrail-handoff

Capture a discovered problem, gap, tech debt, or deferred work into a local work queue so a future agent session can pick it up cold. Use mid-session whenever you set work aside instead of doing it now — a fix you judge out of scope for this PR, work that belongs in a follow-up or a separate/later PR, an item you're deferring, or something worth fixing you won't tackle now — so the outstanding item isn't lost without derailing current work; can be called multiple times per session. Trigger phrases: "defer this", "item deferred", "out of scope for this PR", "follow-up work", "leave for another PR", "capture for later", "outstanding item". This skill captures only. Picking a brief back up is the front door's job: worktrail-go <brief-id>.

69

Quality

87%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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.

A highly actionable skill body: complete copy-paste-ready CLI commands, a well-sequenced workflow with a genuine pre-write validation checkpoint, and clear error and ambiguity handling. The drag is conciseness — repeated front-door messaging, a dated incident anecdote, and policy sections that belong in references.

Suggestions

State the front-door ownership rule once (When to Use) and drop the repeats in Step 3 and Examples — Step 3 needs only the exact confirmation sentence, not the rationale again.

Remove the dated incident (brief 20260817-101013-... closed 2026-08-20) or move it to a reference/old-patterns section; the rule ("a re-verification claim must show the actual command output") stands on its own.

Move the closure re-verification rules, decisions-queue management, and git-backup policy into a reference file (e.g. references/queue-policy.md) to slim the body toward the core capture workflow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly operational and lean, but the front-door ownership message is stated three times ("Picking a brief back up is not this skill's job" in When to Use, "one spelling only" in Step 3, "through the front door, not through this skill" in Examples), the closure section embeds a time-sensitive dated incident ("brief 20260817-101013-... was closed 2026-08-20 with 'disproven...'") outside any old-patterns section, and the offsite-backup paragraph runs long. Mostly efficient, but it could be tightened in several places.

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance throughout: complete CLI invocations with all flags ("worktrail-handoff --focus "$FOCUS_TEXT" --queue-dir "$BASE" ... --json"), the duplicate-check contract including the JSON return shape and all three match branches, exact user-facing confirmation wording, and explicit failure handling ("If creation fails, report the CLI error and do not hand-write a fallback document").

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The capture workflow is clearly sequenced (Step 1 → 1.5 → 2 → 3) with an explicit pre-write validation checkpoint (duplicate check with match/no-match/false-positive/headless branches), ambiguity resolution bounded to one AskUserQuestion, and error-recovery paths on creation failure. This matches the top anchor: clear sequence, explicit validation, feedback loops.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ("Write the brief per `references/handoff-template.md`, which holds the field rules and a complete filled-out example" — verified to exist), and the main workflow stays inline. However, the ~190-line body also inlines substantial policy content (closure re-verification rules, the decisions queue, the git backup policy) that could live in reference files, which is a minor organization gap.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

90%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.

A strong description with explicit what/when framing, comprehensive natural trigger phrases, and a sharp capture-vs-pickup boundary that eliminates conflict risk. The only weakness is second-person voice in the use-conditions, which the rubric penalizes on specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a concrete action ("Capture a discovered problem, gap, tech debt, or deferred work into a local work queue so a future agent session can pick it up cold") plus an explicit boundary ("This skill captures only"), which is more specific than a bare domain mention, but it describes essentially one capture action rather than several. The rubric's second-person penalty applies ("whenever you set work aside", "an item you're deferring", "something worth fixing you won't tackle now"), reducing an otherwise-4 score to 3.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly answers both: what ("Capture a discovered problem, gap, tech debt, or deferred work into a local work queue") and when ("Use mid-session whenever you set work aside instead of doing it now", followed by concrete trigger phrases). This matches the top anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Explicit natural trigger phrases — "defer this", "item deferred", "out of scope for this PR", "follow-up work", "leave for another PR", "capture for later", "outstanding item" — plus in-prose variations ("a fix you judge out of scope for this PR", "work that belongs in a follow-up") give comprehensive coverage of the synonyms a user would actually say.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche with minimal conflict risk: it stakes out capture-only territory ("This skill captures only. Picking a brief back up is the front door's job: worktrail-go <brief-id>") and its triggers are specific to deferral capture, not generic queue or task language.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

behindthedash/worktrail

Path

skills/worktrail-handoff/SKILL.md

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.