CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

feature-planner

A guided workflow for non-technical contributors (designers, PMs) to describe a feature idea and produce a detailed technical implementation plan for an engineer. Invoke manually with /feature-planner.

54

Quality

60%

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/feature-planner/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body is a well-structured, actionable two-phase workflow with concrete tooling guidance and explicit feedback loops; its main weakness is moderate verbosity from verbatim example dialogue scripts that could be condensed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the full verbatim greeting scripts, example confirmation block, and wrap-up quote add unnecessary length that could be tightened without losing clarity.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, actionable guidance — named tools (Figma MCP, Read, EnterPlanMode/ExitPlanMode, Linear MCP), a specific discovery question list, a detailed plan-section checklist, and concrete Linear issue fields — with only minor gaps such as the absence of a sample plan template.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Two phases are clearly sequenced with explicit feedback loops (loop back in discovery, confirm before Phase 2, Linear-MCP-unavailable fallback), missing only an explicit self-validation step confirming the plan is complete before ticket creation.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized with clear hierarchical headers across phases and guidelines, and content is appropriately inline for a conversational workflow with no bundle files; at ~120 lines a few example templates could be trimmed but structure is genuinely navigable.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

53%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 clearly states what the skill does and targets a distinct audience, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and has only sparse natural trigger terms, which cap completeness and trigger quality at 3.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause listing natural phrases a user would say, e.g. 'Use when a designer or PM wants to turn a feature idea or feature request into an engineering implementation plan.'

Expand trigger terms with common variations like 'feature request', 'spec out a feature', 'I have an idea for...', and 'scope a feature' to improve keyword coverage.

Reframe the invocation note as situational trigger guidance rather than only a manual slash-command instruction, so the 'when' is explicit rather than implied.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (feature planning) and two concrete actions ('describe a feature idea' and 'produce a detailed technical implementation plan for an engineer'), but the actions are high-level rather than a comprehensive list of specific capabilities.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clearly stated (guided workflow turning feature ideas into engineering implementation plans), but the 'when' is only weakly implied via 'Invoke manually with /feature-planner' rather than an explicit trigger clause, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains a couple relevant natural terms ('feature idea', 'implementation plan') and the slash command, but lacks a 'Use when...' clause and is missing common variations like 'feature request', 'spec out a feature', or 'I have an idea for...'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The designer/PM-to-engineer handoff niche is mostly distinct with minor overlap risk against generic planning/spec skills, though the description lacks the explicit distinct trigger phrases that anchor 5 requires.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
coinbase/cds
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.