openspec-onboard

Guided onboarding for OpenSpec - walk through a complete workflow cycle with narration and real codebase work.

Quality

58%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/openspec-onboard/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

63%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-sequenced, actionable teaching workflow with concrete commands and clear checkpoints, but it is long and entirely self-contained where some templates and the command reference could be split into reference files to reduce duplication and token load.

Suggestions

Extract the full display templates (welcome, task suggestions, proposal/spec/design/tasks skeletons) and the command-reference table into reference files under ./references/, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview with one-level-deep links.

De-duplicate the command-reference table that appears in both Phase 11 and Graceful Exit Handling by referencing a single shared reference.

Add an explicit verify/validation step after the Apply phase (e.g. running tests or `openspec verify`) before archiving, to close the workflow's validation gap and lift workflow_clarity toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with concrete commands, but includes padded display templates (e.g. an optional ASCII box placeholder) and repeated blocks (the command-reference table appears twice), so it could be tightened, matching the 'mostly efficient but some unnecessary explanation' anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, copy-pasteable commands ('openspec status --json', 'openspec new change', 'openspec archive') plus structured artifact templates, with only minor gaps from bracketed placeholders like <name> and <capability-name>, fitting 'mostly executable guidance with minor gaps'.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	An 11-phase sequence is clearly ordered with explicit PAUSE checkpoints, a preflight validation step, scope guardrails, and graceful-exit handling; the only gap is a missing post-implementation verify/test step, fitting 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The ~280-line body is well sectioned but entirely inline with no bundle files, and content that could live in reference files (full display templates, the command reference) is inlined and partly duplicated, matching the 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 what the skill does but omits any explicit 'when to use it' trigger guidance, capping its completeness. It is specific to OpenSpec onboarding with low conflict risk but only moderate keyword coverage.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger phrases, e.g. 'Use when onboarding to OpenSpec, learning the OpenSpec workflow, or running a first change cycle.'

Expand trigger-term coverage with natural synonyms a user might say (e.g. 'learn OpenSpec', 'first OpenSpec change', 'OpenSpec tutorial').

List a couple more concrete actions (e.g. 'create proposals, specs, design, and tasks') to lift specificity from 3 toward 4.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('onboarding for OpenSpec') and 1-2 concrete actions ('walk through a complete workflow cycle', 'real codebase work') but does not enumerate multiple specific actions, fitting the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor.	3 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' (guided onboarding walking through a workflow cycle) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit 'when' guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains some relevant keywords ('onboarding', 'OpenSpec', 'workflow cycle') a user might say, but lacks common variations, synonyms, or an explicit trigger phrase, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The OpenSpec-specific onboarding niche is mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against other OpenSpec workflow skills, though it lacks sharply distinct trigger phrases that would warrant a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (530 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: fengshao1227/ccg-workflow
Path: .agents/skills/openspec-onboard/SKILL.md
Commit: cc8cc34

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.