CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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.

62

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 ./.agents/skills/openspec-explore/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 content is well-organized with clear sections, concrete OpenSpec anchors, and an unambiguous stance-plus-conditional-flow structure. Its weaknesses are conciseness (padded diagrams and illustrative dialogs) and actionability (a fair amount of abstract behavioral coaching alongside the concrete guidance).

Suggestions

Trim the decorative ASCII boxes and reduce the four full dialog walkthroughs to one or two compact examples to reclaim token budget.

Pair each abstract behavioral directive (e.g. 'ask questions that emerge naturally') with a concrete anchor or micro-example so the guidance is actionable rather than coaching.

Consider moving the multi-entry-point dialog examples into a reference file to keep SKILL.md a lean overview, since the file is ~280 lines.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and avoids lecturing on basics Claude already knows, but it is padded with large decorative ASCII boxes and four full illustrative dialog walkthroughs that could be tightened without losing clarity.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete anchors exist (openspec list --json, artifact paths, the insight-to-artifact capture table, slash commands), but much of the guidance is abstract behavioral coaching ('ask questions that emerge naturally') rather than concrete steps.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

It deliberately declares itself a non-workflow, and the one structured sequence ('When a change exists') is clearly numbered with an explicit user-decides checkpoint; no validation gaps apply since destructive/batch operations are explicitly forbidden.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

It is a single self-contained file with no bundle files or nested references, organized into cleanly headed sections with horizontal rules, giving easy navigation.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 is complete and distinct, with a clear 'Use when' trigger and a well-defined thinking-partner niche. Its main weakness is specificity and trigger breadth: the actions are abstract cognitive verbs and natural-keyword coverage is limited.

Suggestions

Add more natural trigger variations users would say, e.g. 'brainstorm', 'design', 'talk through', 'whiteboard', or 'compare options'.

Make the capabilities slightly more concrete where possible (e.g. 'map architecture', 'compare tradeoffs', 'surface risks') rather than relying on abstract cognitive verbs.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names the thinking domain and several actions ('exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements'), but these are abstract cognitive verbs rather than multiple discrete concrete operations, so it falls short of the level-3 bar.

2 / 3

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does ('thinking partner for exploring ideas...') and provides an explicit 'Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change' trigger, answering both what and when.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

'think through something' and 'explore ideas' are natural phrases a user would say, but coverage is thin and misses common variations like 'brainstorm', 'design', 'talk through', or 'consider options'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a distinct exploration/thinking niche explicitly contrasted with implementation ('before or during a change'), with triggers unlikely to fire for execution skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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
fengshao1227/ccg-workflow
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.