CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

brainstorm

Unified brainstorming skill with dual-mode operation — auto mode (framework generation, parallel multi-role analysis, cross-role synthesis) and single role analysis. Triggers on "brainstorm", "头脑风暴".

56

Quality

64%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/brainstorm/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

54%Scale 1-3

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

This skill has excellent workflow clarity and progressive disclosure structure, with clear phase sequencing, validation checkpoints, and well-organized references to phase documents. However, it is extremely verbose — the same information (data flow, mode detection, phase sequencing) is repeated in multiple formats (ASCII diagrams, prose, code, JSON), significantly inflating token cost. The actionability is moderate since core execution logic is delegated to external phase files and the inline code examples are illustrative rather than executable.

Suggestions

Eliminate redundant representations: the data flow is described via ASCII diagram, prose, and a separate 'Data Flow' section — consolidate to one authoritative representation.

Remove the Architecture Overview ASCII diagram and the detailed Data Flow section; the phase reference table and execution flow section already convey the same information more concisely.

Cut the Available Roles table descriptions — Claude doesn't need Chinese translations or brief focus area descriptions for each role; the role ID list alone suffices.

Remove the JavaScript pseudocode for parameter parsing — it's not executable and the usage examples plus mode detection rules already convey the same logic more concisely.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. Contains extensive ASCII architecture diagrams, redundant data flow descriptions (shown three separate times in different formats), detailed TodoWrite JSON examples, and explanatory content Claude doesn't need (e.g., explaining what each role does, repeating mode detection logic in multiple sections). Much of this could be condensed to 1/3 the size.

1 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete parameter parsing examples, usage examples, and JSON structures for TodoWrite. However, the JavaScript code is illustrative pseudocode (parseArguments, extractFlag are undefined), and the actual execution relies heavily on external phase files (phases/01-mode-routing.md, etc.) that aren't provided. The skill describes what to do at a high level but delegates all real execution details to referenced files.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The multi-phase workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit phase ordering, mode-dependent branching, and a comprehensive coordinator checklist with pre/post-phase validation actions. Error handling table covers recovery strategies. The TodoWrite lifecycle patterns show clear state transitions. Validation checkpoints are present (quality gates, role-analysis-reviewer-agent, output validation).

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Excellent progressive disclosure structure with a clear overview in SKILL.md and well-signaled one-level-deep references to phase documents via a clean reference table. The 'Ref:' marker pattern for on-demand loading is clearly explained. However, since no bundle files are provided, we cannot verify the referenced paths exist, but the structure itself is well-organized with appropriate content splitting.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

75%Scale 1-3

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 establishes a clear niche for brainstorming with explicit trigger terms and a reasonable explanation of its dual-mode operation. Its main weaknesses are the use of internal jargon ('cross-role synthesis', 'parallel multi-role analysis') that doesn't clearly communicate concrete outputs, and a narrow set of trigger terms that misses common user phrasings for ideation tasks.

Suggestions

Expand trigger terms to include natural variations like 'ideas', 'ideation', 'generate ideas', 'explore options', 'think through' to improve matching coverage.

Replace jargon like 'cross-role synthesis' and 'parallel multi-role analysis' with concrete action descriptions, e.g., 'generates ideas from multiple perspectives (e.g., engineer, designer, marketer) and synthesizes them into actionable recommendations'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names the domain (brainstorming) and mentions some actions like 'framework generation', 'parallel multi-role analysis', and 'cross-role synthesis', but these are somewhat jargon-heavy and not fully concrete — a user wouldn't easily understand what 'cross-role synthesis' produces as an output.

2 / 3

Completeness

It answers both 'what' (dual-mode brainstorming with framework generation, multi-role analysis, synthesis) and 'when' (explicitly states triggers on 'brainstorm' and '头脑风暴'). The trigger guidance is explicit even if the trigger terms themselves could be broader.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes 'brainstorm' and '头脑风暴' as explicit trigger terms, which are natural keywords users would say. However, it misses common variations like 'ideas', 'ideation', 'brainstorming session', 'generate ideas', 'think through', or 'explore options' that users might naturally use.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche around brainstorming with specific operational modes (auto vs single role). The explicit trigger terms and specialized vocabulary make it unlikely to conflict with other skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

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

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

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

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow
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.