CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

bmad-review

Multi-lens review over any diff, doc, spec, or artifact — whichever installed lenses fit the content, run singly or together. Shipped lenses include adversarial, edge-case, verification-gap, structure, and prose. Use when the user says "review this", "critical review", "editorial review", "hunt edge cases", "review the structure", or "review the prose".

75

Quality

92%

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

85%

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

A well-structured, highly actionable instruction skill with clear sequencing and effective progressive disclosure of lens detail into reference files. Its one weakness is conciseness — several execution steps bury multiple conditional branches in single overloaded sentences that would read better split apart.

Suggestions

Split Execution step 1's run-on sentence into separate sub-bullets for resolve, forwarded-activation, prepend steps, persistent facts, and review guidance so each conditional branch stands alone.

Break the long Output paragraph (the one covering per-output_format, legacy forwarder contracts, and report_path) into distinct short sentences or a small list.

Move the multi-branch empty-input handling in step 2 into its own sub-list rather than one comma-laden sentence.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and directive with no concept padding, but several sentences are overloaded with embedded conditional branches (e.g., Execution step 1 packs resolution, forwarded activation, prepend, persistent facts, and review guidance into one run-on sentence) that could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable guidance: the exact resolve_customization.py command, a literal empty-input JSON array to return, explicit selection rules, and a field-by-field output shape — concrete and copy-ready instruction (no code needed per the code_vs_instruction note).

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Seven clearly sequenced execution steps with explicit validation/error checkpoints (empty/undecodable input fallback in step 2, independent-vs-dependent lens ordering in steps 5-6, announce-then-execute in step 4).

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview that pushes lens detail to one-level-deep reference files (references/lens-edge-case-hunter.md et al., all verified present), explicitly directing just-in-time loading of only the references that run.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

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, specific description that names concrete capabilities and lens types and pairs them with a clear, natural-language 'Use when' trigger clause. It avoids vague fluff and is easily distinguishable from unrelated skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete capabilities — review actions plus five named shipped lenses (adversarial, edge-case, verification-gap, structure, prose) and concrete content types (diff, doc, spec, artifact).

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both what (multi-lens review over the shipped lenses) and when via an explicit 'Use when' clause with concrete triggers.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes natural phrases a user would say ('review this', 'critical review', 'editorial review', 'hunt edge cases', 'review the structure', 'review the prose') with good coverage of common variations.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (lens-based review with named lens types) and distinct triggers tied to review intent, making it unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

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
bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD
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.