CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

openspec-new-change

Start a new OpenSpec change using the experimental artifact workflow. Use when the user wants to create a new feature, fix, or modification with a structured step-by-step approach.

68

Quality

81%

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

92%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 concise, fully executable workflow with well-organized sections and concrete commands throughout. Its only soft spot is the absence of an explicit validation/verification step before showing the first artifact, though the STOP directive mitigates the risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean, action-oriented body that assumes Claude's competence and avoids explaining what OpenSpec or schemas are; every line is a directive, command, or guardrail that earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready CLI commands (openspec new change, status, instructions) with concrete flags and example output expectations covering the standard flow.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear six-step sequence with an explicit STOP checkpoint and guardrails for invalid/duplicate names, but it relies on the user's status output for validation rather than an automated verify step, leaving a minor checkpoint gap.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are needed; the body is a single well-organized overview under ~50 lines with clear sections (Input, Steps, Output, Guardrails), satisfying the simple-skill exception for a 5.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

71%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 conveys a distinct niche and includes an explicit 'Use when' trigger covering features, fixes, and modifications. It is slightly thin on concrete actions, naming only the start-new-change operation without enumerating what the workflow entails.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 more concrete verbs (e.g., 'scaffold, track, and sequence artifacts') so specificity matches the completeness of the trigger clause.

Consider naming the tool artifact (e.g., 'openspec CLI') in the description to strengthen trigger-term coverage for users who mention the tool by name.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('OpenSpec change', 'artifact workflow') and a concrete action ('start a new change') but lists only one core action and leaves the workflow's actual operations unspecified.

3 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what' (start a new OpenSpec change via the artifact workflow) and 'when' ('Use when the user wants to create a new feature, fix, or modification'), with the 'when' clause explicit and concrete.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural user-facing terms ('new feature', 'fix', 'modification', 'structured step-by-step approach') that a user would plausibly say, though it lacks synonyms or specific command/file keywords.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a specific niche ('OpenSpec change', 'experimental artifact workflow') with distinct triggers unlikely to collide with unrelated skills.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

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
dwmkerr/livedown
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.