CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

incremental-implementation

Delivers changes incrementally. Use when implementing any feature or change that touches more than one file. Use when you're about to write a large amount of code at once, or when a task feels too big to land in one step.

56

Quality

63%

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 ./skills/incremental-implementation/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is incremental-implementation in addyosmani/agent-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

73%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a well-structured process skill that clearly defines the incremental implementation workflow with good validation checkpoints and practical examples. Its main weakness is verbosity — it spends significant tokens on software engineering wisdom (rationalizations table, red flags, simplicity checks) that Claude already knows, and could be trimmed substantially. The workflow clarity is excellent with explicit test/verify/commit cycles and checklists.

Suggestions

Cut the 'Common Rationalizations' table and 'Red Flags' list significantly — these explain general engineering principles Claude already knows. A brief 'Don't batch changes, don't skip tests, don't expand scope' line would suffice.

Trim 'Rule 0: Simplicity First' — the concept of simplicity and YAGNI is well-known to Claude. Keep just the SIMPLICITY CHECK examples as a quick reference.

Consider moving the detailed slicing strategies (Contract-First, Risk-First) to a separate reference file to keep the main skill focused on the core increment cycle.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is reasonably well-written but includes several sections that over-explain concepts Claude already understands — the 'Common Rationalizations' table, the 'Red Flags' list, and some of the implementation rules (like 'Rule 4: Safe Defaults') explain general software engineering principles that Claude knows. The ASCII diagram, while nice, adds tokens without much value. The content could be tightened by ~30-40% without losing actionable guidance.

3 / 5

Actionability

The skill provides concrete examples of slicing strategies, specific code snippets (feature flags, safe defaults), a clear increment cycle, and a practical checklist with specific commands (npm test, npm run build, npx tsc --noEmit). However, it's more of a methodology/process skill than a code-execution skill, so some guidance remains at the principle level rather than being fully executable. The 'Working with Agents' section provides a concrete prompt template which is useful.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is clearly sequenced with the Implement → Test → Verify → Commit → Next slice cycle. Explicit validation checkpoints are present (run tests, build, type check, lint after each increment). The increment checklist and final verification checklist provide clear feedback loops. The note about not re-running unchanged commands shows thoughtful workflow design.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references external resources appropriately (git-workflow-and-versioning for commit guidance, references/definition-of-done.md for the final gate). The content is well-structured with clear headers and sections. However, the skill is quite long (~200+ lines) and some sections like 'Common Rationalizations' and 'Red Flags' could potentially be moved to a reference file. No bundle files are provided to verify the referenced paths exist, but the references are one-level deep and clearly signaled.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 has a reasonably clear 'when to use' clause with concrete trigger conditions, which is its strongest aspect. However, the 'what it does' portion is vague—'delivers changes incrementally' doesn't explain the concrete actions or methodology involved. The description also risks overlapping with many other development-oriented skills due to its broad applicability to any multi-file change.

Suggestions

Add specific concrete actions describing how changes are delivered incrementally (e.g., 'Breaks large changes into smaller commits, creates intermediate checkpoints, validates each step before proceeding').

Include more natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'refactor', 'break down', 'step by step', 'multi-file', or 'incremental'.

Clarify what distinguishes this skill from other coding/development skills by specifying the unique methodology or output format it provides.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a general approach ('delivers changes incrementally') but provides no concrete actions beyond that. There are no specific techniques, tools, or outputs described—just a vague methodology.

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is present but vague ('delivers changes incrementally'), and the 'when' is explicitly stated with two concrete trigger conditions ('more than one file' and 'large amount of code at once'). The 'when' is solid but the 'what' could be more specific about how changes are delivered incrementally.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant trigger phrases like 'more than one file', 'large amount of code', and 'feature or change', but misses natural user terms like 'refactor', 'multi-file change', 'step by step', 'incremental commits', or 'break down task'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The concept of 'delivering changes incrementally' is a general development methodology that could overlap with many coding-related skills. The trigger conditions help somewhat, but 'implementing any feature or change that touches more than one file' is extremely broad and could conflict with many other development skills.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
finlay611/agent-skills
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.