CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

team-issue

Unified team skill for issue resolution. Uses team-worker agent architecture with role directories for domain logic. Coordinator orchestrates pipeline, workers are team-worker agents. Triggers on "team issue".

46

Quality

48%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/team-issue/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%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 is a well-structured orchestration skill that serves effectively as a router and reference document. Its main strengths are clear progressive disclosure with a role registry table, actionable spawn templates, and a comprehensive error handling table. Its weaknesses are the lack of explicit validation checkpoints between pipeline stages and some verbosity in the near-duplicate spawn templates.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation/checkpoint steps between pipeline stages (e.g., 'After explorer completes, coordinator validates context JSON before spawning planner') to improve workflow clarity.

Consolidate the single and parallel spawn templates into one template with inline notes for the parallel-specific fields (agent_name, name suffix) to reduce redundancy and improve conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is reasonably efficient and avoids explaining basic concepts, but the Worker Spawn Template section is quite verbose with two large code blocks that are very similar (single vs parallel spawn). The session directory tree and error handling table add useful reference but could be slightly tighter.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides concrete, copy-paste-ready spawn templates with exact Agent() call syntax, specific CLI tool commands, exact file paths, and a clear role router decision (has --role vs no --role). The session directory structure and error handling table give precise, actionable guidance.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The architecture diagram shows the pipeline flow (clarify -> dispatch -> spawn workers -> STOP) and the role sequence is implied, but explicit validation checkpoints between stages are missing. The review-fix cycle is mentioned ('review rejection exceeds 2 rounds → force convergence') but the actual feedback loop steps are not clearly sequenced. For a multi-step orchestration pipeline involving destructive operations, this lacks explicit validation gates.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill acts as a clear router/overview, with well-signaled one-level-deep references to role files (roles/<name>/role.md) and specs (specs/pipelines.md). The Role Registry table provides a clean navigation index. Content is appropriately split between this overview and the referenced role/spec files.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

25%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.

This description focuses heavily on internal architecture (team-worker agents, coordinator, role directories) rather than describing what the skill actually does for the user. The trigger term 'team issue' is artificial and unlikely to match natural user requests. The description fails to communicate concrete capabilities or provide meaningful keywords for skill selection.

Suggestions

Replace architectural jargon with concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Diagnoses and resolves team-reported issues by analyzing logs, identifying root causes, and proposing fixes'.

Add natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'bug', 'error', 'incident', 'troubleshoot', 'debug', or specific domain terms relevant to the issues being resolved.

Expand the 'Use when...' clause with realistic scenarios, e.g., 'Use when a user reports a bug, requests incident triage, or needs help resolving a production issue'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description uses vague, abstract language like 'issue resolution', 'domain logic', 'orchestrates pipeline' without listing any concrete actions the skill performs. It describes architecture rather than capabilities.

1 / 3

Completeness

It attempts to answer both 'what' (issue resolution using team-worker architecture) and 'when' (triggers on 'team issue'), but the 'what' is vague and the 'when' trigger is extremely narrow and unnatural. The trigger clause exists but is weak.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

The only explicit trigger is 'team issue', which is not a natural phrase users would say. Terms like 'team-worker agent architecture', 'role directories', and 'coordinator orchestrates pipeline' are internal jargon, not user-facing keywords.

1 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Issue resolution' is broad and could overlap with many skills (bug fixing, customer support, etc.), but the specific mention of 'team-worker agent architecture' and the narrow trigger 'team issue' somewhat limits overlap, albeit artificially.

2 / 3

Total

6

/

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.