CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

workflow-tdd-plan-plan

Unified TDD workflow skill combining 6-phase TDD planning with Red-Green-Refactor task chain generation, and 4-phase TDD verification with compliance reporting. Triggers on "workflow-tdd-plan", "workflow-tdd-verify".

44

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/workflow-tdd-plan/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

35%

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

This skill is a comprehensive but excessively verbose orchestration document that repeats the same workflow information in multiple formats (diagrams, prose, checklists, data flow). While the multi-phase TDD workflow is well-structured conceptually, the document violates token efficiency severely — the same concepts are restated 3-4 times across different sections. The pseudocode is illustrative rather than executable, and the absence of bundle files undermines the progressive disclosure architecture the skill describes.

Suggestions

Eliminate redundant sections: the workflow is described in the architecture diagram (§1), execution flow (§6), data flow (§12), and coordinator checklist (§17) — consolidate into one authoritative sequence with the checklist as the primary reference.

Remove sections explaining TDD concepts Claude already knows (§10 'Why Order Matters', 'Red Flags - STOP and Reassess') — these waste tokens on knowledge Claude possesses.

Move the detailed TodoWrite JSON examples (§14) and error/warning tables (§16) into separate reference files to reduce the main SKILL.md to a lean orchestration overview.

Provide the referenced phase files (phases/01-07) as bundle files, or note their absence — without them, the progressive disclosure architecture is incomplete and unverifiable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~500+ lines. Massive amounts of redundancy: the data flow is described in the architecture diagram, then again in the execution flow sections, then again in the coordinator checklists, then again in the TodoWrite pattern examples. Concepts like task attachment/collapse are explained multiple times. The TodoWrite JSON examples are excessively detailed. Much of this content (what TDD is, why test-first matters, 'Red Flags' section) explains things Claude already knows.

1 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides structured pseudocode (JavaScript-like mode detection, preference collection) and concrete phase references with file paths, but nothing is truly executable — the code blocks are illustrative pseudocode, not real commands. The TodoWrite JSON examples and checklists give concrete guidance on what to do, but the actual phase execution details are deferred to external files that aren't provided.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The multi-step workflow is clearly sequenced with phases 1-7, conditional branching (Phase 4), and a decision gate after Phase 6. However, validation checkpoints are weak — error handling is described in tables but lacks explicit 'validate then proceed' feedback loops within the main flow. The error handling section lists recovery actions but doesn't integrate them as explicit checkpoints in the workflow sequence.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references 7 phase files via Read() with a clear phase reference table, which is good progressive disclosure structure. However, no bundle files are provided, so the referenced phases don't actually exist in context. More critically, the SKILL.md itself is monolithic — it inlines enormous amounts of detail (TodoWrite examples, error tables, warning patterns, data flow diagrams) that should be in separate reference files, while the actual phase files that should contain detail are absent.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 identifies a clear niche (TDD workflow planning and verification) and provides distinct trigger commands, making it unlikely to conflict with other skills. However, it relies on jargon-heavy phrasing and command-style triggers rather than natural language, and lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause that would help Claude understand when to select this skill in conversational contexts.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural language triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about test-driven development planning, TDD workflows, writing tests first, or verifying TDD compliance.'

Include more natural user-facing keywords like 'test-driven development', 'write tests first', 'TDD cycle', 'test planning' alongside the command-style triggers to improve discoverability.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (TDD workflow) and mentions some actions like '6-phase TDD planning', 'Red-Green-Refactor task chain generation', '4-phase TDD verification', and 'compliance reporting', but these are somewhat jargon-heavy and not fully concrete in terms of what specific actions are performed.

2 / 3

Completeness

The 'what' is partially addressed (TDD planning, task chain generation, verification, compliance reporting), but the 'when' is only implied through trigger commands rather than explicitly stating when Claude should select this skill in natural language scenarios.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes 'workflow-tdd-plan' and 'workflow-tdd-verify' as trigger terms, plus natural terms like 'TDD', 'Red-Green-Refactor', and 'compliance reporting'. However, the primary triggers are command-style slugs rather than natural language a user would say (e.g., 'test-driven development', 'write tests first', 'TDD plan').

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is quite specific to a unified TDD workflow combining planning and verification phases, with distinct command-based triggers. It is unlikely to conflict with other skills due to its narrow, well-defined niche.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation9 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (528 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

allowed_tools_field

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

Warning

Total

9

/

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.