CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

ralph-prompt-research

Generate Ralph-compatible prompts for research, analysis, and planning tasks. Creates prompts with systematic research phases, synthesis requirements, and deliverable specifications. Use when analyzing codebases, creating migration plans, researching technologies, auditing security, or any task requiring investigation before action.

Quality

80%

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/ralph-prompt-research/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is ralph-prompt-research in fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%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.

Highly actionable and workflow-excellent content: complete templates, worked examples, validation checkpoints, and feedback loops leave nothing ambiguous about how to generate or structure a research prompt. Its main weakness is token efficiency — heavy duplication between the generic templates and the two full example prompts — and the absence of any progressive disclosure, with everything inlined in a single ~735-line file.

Suggestions

Move the two full worked example prompts (security audit, framework comparison) into an examples/ reference file, keeping only a one-line pointer per example in SKILL.md; this would cut roughly 300 lines while preserving the templates that carry the actual instructions.

Collapse the 'Best Practices' DO/DON'T lists into the existing phase success criteria (they restate the same guidance) and trim the 'Ralph Philosophy' paragraph to a single sentence.

Create a references/ directory for the phase deliverable templates (inventory, analysis notes, findings summary, recommendations formats) so the main body reads as a compact overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~735-line body contains two full worked example prompts (~300 lines) that largely restate the phase structure already specified in the workflow templates, plus DO/DON'T 'Best Practices' lists repeating earlier guidance and a motivational 'Ralph Philosophy' paragraph. This is noticeably verbose with several padded sections — anchor 2; not 1 because it never explains concepts Claude already knows, and not 3 because the redundancy is substantial rather than incidental.

2 / 5

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready generation snippet in Quick Start, complete markdown templates for every phase deliverable with exact file formats, checkpoint blocks, two fully worked example prompts, and a concrete integration command ('/ralph-wiggum:ralph-loop "..." --completion-promise "..." --max-iterations 50'). Fully executable with specific examples covering the common cases — anchor 5.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 4-step generation workflow, and the generated prompt embeds per-phase success criteria, explicit checkpoint blocks ('DISCOVERY COMPLETE: ...'), final completeness/quality checklists, and an 'If Stuck' error-recovery loop ('Do NOT skip analysis or output false promise'). Clear sequence with explicit validation, feedback loops, and checklists — anchor 5.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ all absent), so all content lives in one file: ~300 lines of worked examples and extended templates that clearly belong in separate reference files are inlined. Good section headers keep it navigable and cross-links to sibling skills exist, so structure is present but content that should be split out is inline — anchor 3, not 2 (the document is well-sectioned, not headerless), not 4 (bulk content is not appropriately placed in separate files).

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 strong description in third-person voice with a clear 'what', an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause, and multiple natural trigger phrases. Trigger coverage and action enumeration are good but fall just short of comprehensive, leaving minor overlap risk with related skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (research/analysis/planning prompts) and several concrete actions — 'systematic research phases, synthesis requirements, and deliverable specifications' — with minor gaps in coverage (e.g., no mention of audit reports or comparison matrices it demonstrably produces). Not 5 because the action list stops short of comprehensive; not 3 because it lists several specific actions rather than 1-2.

4 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what' ('Generate Ralph-compatible prompts... Creates prompts with systematic research phases, synthesis requirements, and deliverable specifications') and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when' clause listing concrete trigger phrases. Matches the anchor-5 example structure exactly; neither what nor when is vague or implied.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'analyzing codebases, creating migration plans, researching technologies, auditing security' are natural phrases users would say. Not 5 because common variations are missing ('security audit', 'tech comparison', 'code review', 'documentation'); not 3 because coverage goes beyond 'some relevant keywords' with multiple distinct natural triggers.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Ralph-compatible' carves a clear niche distinct from generic skills, but broad triggers like 'analyzing codebases' and 'researching technologies' could overlap with sibling skills (ralph-prompt-single-task/project) and general analysis skills. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk — anchor 4, not 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (736 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz

Path

.claude/skills/ralph-prompt-research/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.