CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

team-lifecycle-v4

Full lifecycle team skill — plan, develop, test, review in one coordinated session. Role-based architecture with coordinator-driven beat model. Triggers on "team lifecycle v4".

47

Quality

49%

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/team-lifecycle-v4/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

64%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 with strong actionability — concrete spawn templates, exact paths, and specific commands make it immediately executable. Its main weaknesses are that it inlines substantial template/lifecycle detail that could be offloaded to referenced files, and the pipeline workflow lacks explicit validation checkpoints between phases (relying on external specs for sequencing). The role registry and error handling tables are effective and concise.

Suggestions

Move the Worker Spawn Template and Supervisor Spawn Template (spawn/wake/shutdown) into a separate file (e.g., specs/spawn-templates.md) and reference it from SKILL.md to reduce inline verbosity.

Add explicit validation/checkpoint steps in the main workflow sequence (e.g., 'After planning completes, supervisor validates before implementation begins') rather than relying entirely on specs/pipelines.md for sequencing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is reasonably efficient and avoids explaining basic concepts, but includes verbose template blocks (Worker Spawn Template, Supervisor Spawn Template with spawn/wake/shutdown) that could be moved to referenced spec files. The architecture ASCII diagram and role registry table are useful but the overall document is long for a router/overview file.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready spawn templates with exact Agent() and SendMessage() call structures, specific CLI commands, exact file paths, session directory layout, and precise routing logic. The user commands table and error handling table give specific, actionable guidance.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The architecture diagram shows the high-level flow (specification → planning → implementation → testing → review) and the role router logic is clear. However, the actual multi-step orchestration sequence lacks explicit validation checkpoints — there's no clear 'validate before proceeding' step between phases. The supervisor checkpoint mechanism exists but the overall pipeline sequencing relies on referenced specs/pipelines.md rather than being explicit here.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

References to role files (roles/*/role.md) and specs (specs/pipelines.md, specs/quality-gates.md, specs/knowledge-transfer.md) are well-signaled and one level deep. However, the spawn templates and supervisor lifecycle details are inlined when they could be in a separate reference file, making the SKILL.md heavier than an ideal overview/router. No bundle files were provided to verify referenced paths exist.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

35%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 provides a high-level overview of a coordinated development workflow but relies heavily on jargon ('coordinator-driven beat model', 'role-based architecture') and an artificial trigger phrase ('team lifecycle v4') rather than natural user language. It partially describes what the skill does but fails to articulate when it should be used in terms of real user scenarios or natural language triggers.

Suggestions

Replace the artificial trigger 'team lifecycle v4' with natural language triggers describing when users would need this, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to coordinate a full development workflow including planning, coding, testing, and code review in a single session.'

Add concrete, specific actions beyond the generic phases — e.g., 'Assigns roles to sub-agents, generates project plans, writes implementation code, creates test suites, and performs code reviews.'

Include natural keywords users might say, such as 'multi-step development', 'end-to-end project', 'coordinated workflow', 'team simulation', or 'automated development pipeline'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (team lifecycle) and lists some actions (plan, develop, test, review), but these are high-level phases rather than concrete, specific actions. 'Role-based architecture with coordinator-driven beat model' is jargon rather than concrete capability description.

2 / 3

Completeness

The 'what' is partially addressed (plan, develop, test, review in a coordinated session), but the 'when' is limited to the artificial trigger phrase 'team lifecycle v4' rather than describing natural scenarios or user needs that would invoke this skill.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

The only explicit trigger is the artificial phrase 'team lifecycle v4', which is not something a user would naturally say. Terms like 'role-based architecture' and 'coordinator-driven beat model' are technical jargon, not natural user language.

1 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The artificial trigger 'team lifecycle v4' makes accidental triggering unlikely, but the general terms 'plan, develop, test, review' are very broad and could overlap with many development-related skills. The distinctiveness relies on an artificial keyword rather than a naturally distinct niche.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

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.