CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

bmad-technical-research

Deprecated — forwards to bmad-deep-recon (technical type)

45

Quality

48%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./src/bmm-skills/v6-shims/bmad-technical-research/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 is a well-structured, mostly actionable forwarding shim: concrete commands, a clear 3-step sequence, and a clean stop boundary. Its main weakness is an over-long catalog of the target skill's features that pads the intro beyond what a shim requires.

Suggestions

Trim the intro to one line stating the consolidation and where to migrate; drop the full bmad-deep-recon feature list, which belongs on that skill, not this shim.

Add a brief verification cue (e.g., confirm the resolved customization values are non-empty before invoking bmad-deep-recon) to give the workflow an explicit checkpoint.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The activation steps are lean, but the intro paragraph enumerates bmad-deep-recon's full surface ('drafts deep-research prompts... processes finished reports... runs research directly, across market, domain, technical, competitive...') which is padding a shim does not need.

3 / 5

Actionability

Steps are concrete and executable: an exact resolve_customization.py command with arguments, the fields to pass verbatim, and the directive to invoke bmad-deep-recon with research type 'technical'.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The three-step On Activation sequence is clearly ordered and ends with an explicit boundary ('bmad-deep-recon takes the workflow from here — do not execute any further steps'), though there is no explicit validation checkpoint.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The ~17-line body is well organized into an intro plus an On Activation section with no unnecessary external references; as a simple single-purpose shim it is appropriately flat, just missing a touch of crispness for a 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

28%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.

This is an honest but thin deprecation notice rather than a capability description: it states what it forwards to but offers no trigger guidance and only one generic keyword. It is distinguishable from unrelated skills yet overlaps with the family it redirects into.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause stating when Claude should select this skill (e.g., legacy invocations of bmad-technical-research) so completeness can exceed the 3-cap.

Surface a natural trigger term a user would actually say, such as 'technical research' or 'technical deep-research', rather than relying on the skill name alone.

Briefly state the concrete capability (drafting/processing/running technical research) so the 'what' is more than the generic action 'forwards'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names the domain ('forwards to bmad-deep-recon (technical type)') but the only action stated is the generic 'forwards', with no concrete capability described.

2 / 5

Completeness

It gives a vague 'what' (forwards to bmad-deep-recon) but entirely lacks a 'when'/Use-when trigger clause, capping completeness well below the explicit-trigger anchors.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The only semi-natural term is 'technical'; there are no phrases a user would actually say to invoke this skill, just deprecation jargon and a target skill name.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Naming a specific target skill and 'technical type' gives it a niche, but as a thin shim it still overlaps with the broader bmad-deep-recon family.

3 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

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.