CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

stand-scenarios

Turn docs/product/SCENARIOS.md into testable claims for the deployed-stand suite — QA scenario design for Insight. Pick a scenario (S-1…S-10), a persona (EXEC/LEAD/IC/ADMIN), an invariant (§5 rules 1-12) or an Appendix A question (A1…G4), ground it in the seeded roster, and emit claims with an oracle, a layer and a priority that stand-api-test / stand-ui-test can implement. Use when the task is deciding WHAT to test: 'what should we test for S-9', 'design e2e scenarios from the product doc', 'which product rules are unverified', 'is the IC boundary covered', 'plan coverage for the reach matrix', 'convert the scenarios doc into tests'. Not for writing test code — that is stand-api-test and stand-ui-test; for scoping tests from a GitHub issue or an unbuilt feature use scope-feature-tests instead.

75

Quality

94%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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.

A high-quality, densely actionable body that sequences a multi-step QA workflow with strong validation checkpoints and pushes detail into well-signaled pattern files. The only slack is minor rhetorical padding and unverified reference targets.

Suggestions

Trim purposeful-emphasis flourishes like 'that is the whole opportunity here' and 'and that is the point' to recover tokens without losing guidance.

Confirm the referenced pattern files (persona-reach.md, invariants.md, SCENARIO-COVERAGE.md) ship alongside SKILL.md so the progressive-disclosure structure holds in practice.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean, domain-specific guidance with no generic concept padding, but a few rhetorical flourishes ('that is the whole opportunity here', 'and that is the point') could be trimmed without losing signal.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: concrete file paths, ready grep commands, a copy-paste claim-form template, an ID scheme, and decision tables for oracles, layers, priorities and 404-vs-403 reasoning.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A 10-step numbered Procedure with explicit validation checkpoints (stop where no surface, self-check step 8, read issued IDs before minting) and feedback loops; the batch-operation cap does not bind because validation is present.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A clear 'Pattern files' section points one level deep to persona-reach.md and invariants.md, each described by contents; scored 4 rather than 5 because the referenced files are not present in the bundle to confirm the split is fully appropriate.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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.

An exemplary description: concrete actions, a rich set of natural trigger phrases, and explicit what/when guidance with active boundary disambiguation against sibling skills. No vague fluff or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — pick a scenario/persona/invariant, ground it in the seeded roster, and emit claims with an oracle, layer and priority — giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill does.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (turn SCENARIOS.md into testable claims with oracle/layer/priority) and when (a 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers), in third-person voice.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Six quoted natural trigger phrases ('what should we test for S-9', 'design e2e scenarios from the product doc', 'which product rules are unverified', etc.) cover the ways a user would actually request this.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (QA scenario design for the Insight stand suite) and explicitly disambiguates from stand-api-test, stand-ui-test, and scope-feature-tests, minimizing wrong-skill triggering.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

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

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 7 missing, 1 suspicious

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
constructorfabric/insight
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.