CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

360-feedback-system

360 feedback register: reviewer, subject, review cycle, visibility, due date and score, as CSV, SQL, JSON Schema or Notion on request. Use for 360 reviews or peer feedback cycles.

66

Quality

83%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%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.

Highly actionable content with a clearly sequenced, validated workflow and concrete artifact examples. Its weaknesses are repetition (the field list appears five times despite being declared single-source) and a monolithic single-file layout with no progressive disclosure for a skill of this size.

Suggestions

Replace the four inline artifact templates (CSV example, SQL DDL, JSON Schema, Notion mapping) with short derivation notes plus one canonical example, keeping only the Field Reference as the single source of the field list.

Move the Select Options lists and the full artifact templates into a references/ file (e.g. references/artifact-templates.md) and link to them from SKILL.md, reducing the body to the workflow and decision rules.

Consolidate the repeated Unknown-handling and example-value/no-confirmed-taxonomy rules into one statement each in Step 2 and the Field Reference rules, and drop the later restatements.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The rules themselves are dense and purposeful, but the 11-field list is restated five times (CSV header, SQL DDL, JSON Schema, Notion mapping, Field Reference) even though the file declares the Field Reference 'the single source ... never written by hand', and principles like Unknown-handling and 'documented shape, not a confirmed taxonomy' are repeated several times.

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully concrete: an intent table with triggers and go-tos, a confirmation-gated field table, an internal-context YAML shape, complete executable SQL DDL, a valid JSON Schema, a concrete CSV row, a Notion mapping, a worked example dialogue, and a reusable prompt. The few placeholders (<int type>, <confirmed options>) are explicitly justified by unconfirmed engine/options.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-5 are clearly sequenced with an explicit validation checkpoint ('Validate before replying, then check cross-format consistency'), an error feedback loop (return the error naming the field, emit what succeeded, say which is missing), re-ask loops for ambiguous answers, and a Best Practices checklist. Template generation involves no destructive or batch operations, so no cap applies.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single 455-line file is well sectioned, but no bundle references exist; the four inline artifact templates and Select Options lists are exactly the content that belongs in separate reference files, and the only pointers are external skill references (@notion-manual-import, Module Catalog) rather than a real reference structure.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

A strong description: it states what is recorded, the key fields, and the output formats, and closes with an explicit 'Use for' trigger clause. The main gaps are a single action verb and a few missing natural synonyms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain plus a concrete field list ('reviewer, subject, review cycle, visibility, due date and score') and four named output formats ('CSV, SQL, JSON Schema or Notion on request'), but relies on a single action verb ('register'), so coverage of actions has minor gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

The what-clause explicitly states the domain, the fields, and the formats, and the explicit 'Use for...' clause provides concrete trigger phrases; both what and when are clearly answered.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Use for 360 reviews or peer feedback cycles' plus '360 feedback' in the what-clause are natural user phrases, but common variations such as '360 degree feedback' and 'peer review' are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'360 reviews' and 'peer feedback cycles' carve a clear niche, but 'peer feedback' has minor overlap risk with generic survey/HR register skills in the same module family.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

boisenoise/skills-collections

Path

skills/antigravity-360-feedback-system/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.