CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

openspec-explore

Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change.

57

Quality

72%

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 ./.claude/skills/openspec-explore/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.

A well-organized behavioral skill that conveys its stance effectively with concrete anchors (a runnable command, real artifact paths, and a specific insight-to-artifact capture table). Its main weakness is redundancy: the stance principles are repeated across three sections and the illustrative transcripts are long, inflating token cost without adding proportional guidance.

Suggestions

Merge 'The Stance', 'What You Don't Have To Do', and 'Guardrails' into a single section - they restate the same principles ('Don't rush', 'Don't auto-capture', 'Do visualize', 'Don't force structure') nearly verbatim.

Trim the four entry-point transcripts to one or two representative examples, or move them to a separate examples reference file, keeping only the ASCII-diagram variety inline.

Add the concrete command for transitioning out of explore mode (e.g., creating a change proposal) so the 'exit explore mode first' reminder is executable rather than a pointer.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body restates its core principles three times across 'The Stance' ('Do visualize', 'Grounded'), 'What You Don't Have To Do' ('Don't rush', 'Be brief'), and 'Guardrails' ('Do visualize - A good diagram is worth many paragraphs', 'Don't rush', 'Don't auto-capture'), and the four entry-point transcripts occupy roughly a third of the file. It never explains concepts Claude already knows, so it stays above anchor 2, but the duplicated stance sections and long illustrative dialogs could be tightened, matching anchor 3.

3 / 5

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is largely concrete: the command 'openspec list --json', specific artifact paths ('openspec/changes/<name>/proposal.md', 'design.md', 'tasks.md'), a table mapping insight types to capture files ('specs/<capability>/spec.md'), and modeled offer phrasings ('This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create a proposal?'). It falls short of anchor 5 only because the core exploration behavior is conveyed through illustrative transcripts rather than directly executable instruction, matching anchor 4.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'When a change exists' branch is an explicitly numbered sequence (read artifacts -> reference naturally -> offer to capture -> 'The user decides') with a clear checkpoint against auto-capturing, and the single concrete command 'openspec list --json' anchors the context check. It falls short of anchor 5 because the mode is intentionally unsequenced and minor gaps remain (e.g., no explicit command for exiting explore mode to create a proposal), matching anchor 4's 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

As a single-file skill with no bundle directories, the content is well organized under clear section headers (Stance, What You Might Do, OpenSpec Awareness, Entry Points, Ending, Guardrails) with no nested references. It falls short of anchor 5 because the four long entry-point dialogue transcripts (~100 lines of illustrative content) could live in a separate examples file rather than the main SKILL.md, matching anchor 4's 'minor organization gaps'.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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.

A solid description with an explicit and natural 'Use when' trigger clause, third-person voice, and a reasonably distinct niche. Its main weakness is that the stated capabilities are abstract thinking activities rather than concrete operations, and it misses several natural trigger variations users might say.

Suggestions

Make the 'what' more concrete by naming the tangible activities: mapping architecture, comparing options, sketching tradeoffs, and surfacing risks/unknowns from the codebase.

Add common trigger variations users would naturally say, such as 'brainstorm', 'talk through an idea', 'discuss an approach', or 'spike', to the 'Use when' clause.

Tighten 'Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for...' into a direct third-person capability statement so the leading action is concrete rather than a mode invocation.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names its domain ('a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements') and lists three actions, but these are abstract thinking verbs rather than the concrete, specific operations of the anchor-4/5 examples ('Extracts text from PDF files, fills forms, converts pages to images'). It is above anchor 2 because it does list multiple actions beyond just naming the domain.

3 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers 'when' with 'Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change' and answers 'what' with 'a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements'. The 'when' clause is concrete, but the 'what' ('Enter explore mode') is somewhat abstract, so it sits between anchors 4 and 5 rather than clearly matching anchor 5's fully concrete what-and-when.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases are present ('think through something', 'exploring ideas', 'investigating problems', 'clarifying requirements'), but common user variations such as 'brainstorm', 'talk through', 'discuss', or 'spike' are missing, matching the anchor for some relevant keywords without full synonym coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Explore mode', 'thinking partner', and 'before or during a change' tie the trigger to a distinct OpenSpec-specific stance with minimal overlap risk; only minor overlap exists with general planning or brainstorming skills, matching anchor 4.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

dwmkerr/livedown

Path

.claude/skills/openspec-explore/SKILL.md

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.