CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

team-tech-debt

Unified team skill for tech debt identification and remediation. Scans codebase for tech debt, assesses severity, plans and executes fixes with validation. Uses team-worker agent architecture with roles/ for domain logic. Coordinator orchestrates pipeline, workers are team-worker agents. Triggers on "team tech debt".

58

Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.codex/skills/team-tech-debt/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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 clearly defines the coordinator-worker architecture, provides concrete spawn templates and tool allowlists, and sequences the multi-step pipeline with validation checkpoints. The progressive disclosure is excellent with a clear role registry pointing to individual role files. Minor verbosity in explanatory sections (model selection rationale, pipeline pattern description) could be trimmed without losing clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is fairly well-structured but includes some content that could be tightened — the architecture ASCII diagram, model selection rationale column, and pipeline pattern explanation add moderate verbosity. The delegation lock table and agent coordination sections are useful but could be more compact.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete spawn_agent templates with exact parameters, specific tool call allowlists/blocklists, exact file paths, CLI commands, timeout values (1800000ms), and named agent targeting examples. The worker spawn template is copy-paste ready.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The pipeline is clearly sequenced (scan → assess → plan → fix → validate) with explicit validation checkpoints: the delegation lock acts as a pre-execution gate, timeout handling has a 3-step escalation (STATUS_CHECK → FINALIZE → close), agent health checks reconcile state, and error handling covers edge cases like scanner finding no debt.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md serves as a clear router/overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references to roles/<name>/role.md for each worker and specs/pipelines.md for pipeline definitions. The role registry table provides a clean navigation index. Content is appropriately split between the overview and role-specific files.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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 provides a reasonable overview of what the skill does (tech debt identification and remediation) but is cluttered with implementation architecture details (team-worker agents, coordinator, pipeline, roles/) that don't help Claude decide when to use it. The trigger phrase is too narrow ('team tech debt') and misses many natural user expressions. It would benefit from removing internal architecture details and adding broader trigger guidance.

Suggestions

Replace architecture details ('team-worker agent architecture', 'coordinator orchestrates pipeline', 'roles/ for domain logic') with more user-facing capability descriptions like 'identifies code smells, outdated dependencies, duplicated code, and missing tests'.

Expand trigger guidance with a proper 'Use when...' clause covering natural variations: 'Use when the user mentions technical debt, tech debt, code quality issues, refactoring needs, legacy code cleanup, or code smells'.

Add common file type or language context if applicable (e.g., 'across Python, JavaScript, or TypeScript codebases') to improve distinctiveness and trigger matching.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (tech debt) and some actions (scans codebase, assesses severity, plans and executes fixes with validation), but also includes implementation details about architecture (team-worker agents, coordinator, pipeline) that don't describe user-facing capabilities. The actual concrete actions are somewhat listed but mixed with internal architecture jargon.

2 / 3

Completeness

The 'what' is partially covered (scans, assesses, plans, fixes tech debt). There is a trigger phrase ('Triggers on "team tech debt"'), but it's very narrow and not framed as a proper 'Use when...' clause with broader guidance on when Claude should select this skill. The trigger is too specific and doesn't cover natural user language variations.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes 'tech debt' as a key term users might say, and mentions 'team tech debt' as a trigger phrase. However, it misses common variations like 'technical debt', 'code quality', 'refactor', 'legacy code', 'code smell', or 'cleanup' that users would naturally use.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'team tech debt' trigger is distinctive but overly narrow. The broader description of scanning codebases and fixing issues could overlap with general code review or refactoring skills. The team-worker architecture detail adds some distinctiveness but is an implementation detail rather than a functional differentiator.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

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.