reviewer-protocol

Reviewer rejection workflow and strict lockout semantics

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.copilot/skills/reviewer-protocol/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

100%

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

The content body is a strong, lean instruction set: concrete MUST rules, explicit validation checkpoints, deadlock escalation, and clear worked examples, with appropriately organized sections and one-level references to related skills. It fully satisfies the conciseness, actionability, workflow-clarity, and progressive-disclosure dimensions.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and efficient, assuming Claude's competence without explaining what a reviewer or lockout is in general terms; every section earns its place (Context, Patterns, Examples, Anti-Patterns), matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor.	3 / 3
Actionability	It provides concrete, executable guidance — explicit MUST rules (verify the revision agent is not the original author; refuse and ask for a different agent; escalate to user on deadlock) plus specific worked examples, rather than vague direction.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Multi-step processes are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (pre-spawn author verification), a deadlock-handling escalation feedback loop, and a per-artifact scope rule, matching the 'clear sequence with explicit validation and feedback loops' anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is a single well-organized overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep references to related review skills (architectural-review, security-review SKILL.md), and content is appropriately organized into sections rather than nested multi-level references.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 is concise and identifies a distinct domain, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger and concrete action verbs, capping completeness and trigger-term quality at 2. It is a clear but generic single-sentence statement rather than a fully-triggered capability description.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, e.g., 'Use when a Reviewer role rejects an artifact and the coordinator must enforce author lockout for reassignment or escalation.'

Expand specificity with concrete actions, e.g., 'Enforces reviewer rejection by reassigning revision to a different agent, escalating to a new expert, and locking the original author out until approval.'

Include natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'code review rejection', 'reject and reassign', or 'escalate revision'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names a specific domain ('Reviewer rejection workflow and strict lockout semantics') but only gestures at one broad capability area rather than listing multiple concrete actions like approve, reassign, or escalate, so it is not yet at the 'multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	It answers 'what this does' (reviewer rejection workflow, lockout semantics) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which the guidelines cap completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes relevant keywords such as 'Reviewer', 'rejection', and 'lockout', but lacks common natural variations a user would say (e.g., 'code review', 'reject', 'reassign', 'escalate'), matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is fairly specific (reviewer rejection and lockout) and unlikely to broadly conflict, but without explicit triggers it could still overlap with general review or orchestration skills, so it sits at the 'somewhat specific but could still overlap' anchor rather than the clear-niche level.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: bradygaster/squad
Path: .copilot/skills/reviewer-protocol/SKILL.md
Commit: e23dd92

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.