CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

code-execution

Use when a subtask is ready to implement and has a subtask JSON file with acceptance criteria and deliverables.

56

Quality

63%

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 ./plugins/claude-code/skills/code-execution/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%

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

The body presents a clear, well-sequenced 8-step workflow with a strong mandatory self-review validation checkpoint and feedback loop, and it stays self-contained with good organization. Its main weaknesses are templated/placeholder pseudo-commands that aren't fully copy-paste ready and redundant reinforcement between the Red Flags and Common Rationalizations sections.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean with short bullets and snippets and avoids explaining basic concepts Claude already knows, but the "Red Flags" list and "Common Rationalizations" table substantially restate the same messages, which could be tightened; this matches the score-2 anchor of mostly efficient with some unnecessary content.

2 / 3

Actionability

It gives concrete commands (grep anti-pattern scans, router.sh complete/status) but mixes in templated pseudo-syntax ("Read: .tmp/tasks/{feature}/subtask_{seq}.json" with {feature}/{seq} placeholders) that is not copy-paste ready, matching the score-2 anchor of some concrete guidance with incomplete/templated details.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step sequence is clearly ordered with an explicit mandatory validation checkpoint in Step 6 (type/import checks, anti-pattern scan, acceptance-criteria verification) and a real fix-and-retry feedback loop ("Fix unmet criteria before proceeding", "DO NOT mark complete"), matching the score-3 anchor of a clear sequence with validation steps and feedback loops.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the content is self-contained with well-organized sections (Overview, Process, Error Handling, Red Flags, Rationalizations, Remember, Related) and no nested references, meeting the rubric's allowance that single-purpose skills with no external references can score 3 with well-organized sections.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

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 has an explicit and fairly distinctive trigger tied to a subtask pipeline, but it states the "when" far more clearly than the "what" and leans on internal jargon (subtask JSON, acceptance criteria) rather than natural user language. Strengthening the capability statement and adding user-natural terms would lift completeness and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Lead with a concrete capability verb (e.g., "Implements coding subtasks with mandatory self-review and acceptance-criteria validation") so the "what" is stated explicitly, not just implied by the trigger.

Add natural user-facing trigger terms alongside the pipeline jargon (e.g., "Use when implementing a coding task, building a feature step, or completing a subtask with defined acceptance criteria").

Keep the distinctive subtask-JSON precondition but rephrase it so a user would recognize the intent (e.g., mention "coding task" or "feature step") rather than only internal artifact names.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete inputs ("subtask JSON file", "acceptance criteria", "deliverables") but describes a readiness condition rather than listing multiple concrete actions, so it stops at the score-2 anchor of naming domain and some actions without being comprehensive.

2 / 3

Completeness

The "when" is explicit via the "Use when a subtask is ready to implement..." clause, but the "what" is only implied through that trigger rather than stated as a capability, falling short of the score-3 anchor that states both clearly; it is above score-1 because an explicit trigger is present.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords exist ("subtask", "implement", "acceptance criteria", "deliverables") but they are pipeline-internal jargon tied to a task-management system rather than natural user phrasing, matching the score-2 anchor of some relevant keywords missing common variations.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The requirement of a pre-existing subtask JSON file with acceptance criteria and deliverables carves a specific niche tied to a task-management pipeline, making it unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills and matching the score-3 anchor of a clear niche with distinct triggers.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
darrenhinde/OpenAgentsControl
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.