CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

pair

Guided pair-programming mode where Claude teaches rather than writes code, ensuring engineers learn while building

53

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 ./tiles/crafter/skills/pair/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 content is a well-structured, actionable instruction-only skill with a clear workflow, explicit validation checkpoints, and good token efficiency, only narrowly missing top marks for lacking external reference organization and a few trimmable passages.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficiently organized with tables, tight principles, and example phrases; it assumes Claude's intelligence rather than explaining basic concepts, with only minor instances (some situation-handling entries) that could be trimmed, fitting the 'efficient with minor over-explanation' anchor above the midpoint.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides concrete, specific guidance: strictness-level tables, a progressive-hints ladder with example lines, and explicit enforcement rules per mode, which is mostly executable instruction with only minor gaps (e.g., example exit phrases are illustrative rather than scripted).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-step workflow (initialization, session loop, exit/summary) is sequenced with sub-steps and explicit checkpoints (REQUIRED AskUserQuestion, Next Steps Quality Check); it is not a destructive/batch operation so the cap does not apply, and it sits just below the 'explicit feedback loops with checklists' anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single-purpose behavioral skill is well-structured with clearly labeled sections and no need for external bundle files (none present); it lacks the one-level-deep reference pattern that would reach 5, but organization is strong with only minor gaps.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

46%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 the skill's purpose and teaching philosophy but lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and natural user keywords within the description text itself, capping completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause to the description naming concrete trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when the user wants to learn by doing, says teach me, or wants to be guided rather than have code written for them').

Surface natural user keywords (e.g., 'pair', 'teach me', 'guide me') inside the description so the trigger-term coverage does not depend solely on the separate triggers block.

Expand the capability list beyond a single action to raise specificity (e.g., 'guides debugging, explains design trade-offs, reviews engineer-written code, and builds understanding through Socratic questioning').

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names the domain (pair-programming) and one concrete behavior ("Claude teaches rather than writes code"), plus an outcome ("engineers learn while building"), but does not enumerate multiple specific actions, matching the anchor for a clear single-domain action that is not comprehensive.

3 / 5

Completeness

It gives a clear "what" (guided pair-programming where Claude teaches rather than writes code) but no "when" / "Use when..." clause in the description, and per the rubric a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The description itself contains only "pair-programming" as a relevant term and no natural user phrases like "teach me" or "guide me" (those live only in the separate triggers block), so it is below the midpoint with just a couple of relevant keywords missing the natural phrases.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"pair-programming mode where Claude teaches rather than writes code" carves a clear teaching niche distinct from normal coding skills, with only minor overlap risk against generic help/guidance skills, fitting the "mostly distinct" anchor.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

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
ericjohnolson/tessl-test
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.