CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

oma-coordination

Guide for coordinating PM, Frontend, Backend, Mobile, and QA agents on complex projects via CLI. Use for manual step-by-step coordination and workflow guidance.

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

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/oma-coordination/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body delivers an actionable, well-sequenced coordination workflow with executable spawn commands and explicit QA/contract checkpoints, but it carries some structural redundancy and a dangling empty References section with no progressive file structure.

Suggestions

Trim the redundant routing logic that appears in both 'When NOT to use'/'Transitions' and the Workflow, and consider dropping the abstract SSL-primitive and resource-scope tables unless they drive a concrete decision.

Either populate the '## References' section with real linked files (e.g., per-agent role specs, command reference) or remove the empty section.

Make the contract validation checkpoint concrete with an actual check command or explicit pass/fail criterion instead of the abstract VALIDATE row.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence, but the SSL-primitive and resource-scope tables plus redundancy between When-to-use, Transitions, and the Workflow steps add padding that could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete executable commands (oma agent:spawn ... -w ./pm, parallel &/wait, --isolation worktree) and concrete file patterns (progress-{agent}[-{sessionId}].md), with only minor gaps such as the abstract VALIDATE step lacking a concrete check command.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequence (Entry, PREPARE/ACT/VERIFY/FINALIZE, Steps 1-4) with explicit checkpoints and feedback loops (QA as final step, re-spawn on CRITICAL, pause on contract divergence), though contract validation is guidance-level rather than a concrete gate.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized with clear section headers, but at ~160 lines everything is inlined in a single file, no bundle files exist, and the trailing '## References' section is empty and dangling.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 cleanly answers both what and when in third person and carves out a distinct niche, but its action vocabulary is generic and its trigger terms rely on internal role jargon rather than natural user phrasing.

Suggestions

Replace generic verbs like 'coordinating' and 'workflow guidance' with concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., decompose tasks, spawn agents by priority, monitor progress files, run QA review).

Add natural trigger phrases users would actually say (e.g., 'Use when the user asks to coordinate multiple specialist agents' or '...wants manual step-by-step multi-agent planning').

Sharpen the when-clause with concrete triggers such as 'full-stack or mobile features spanning frontend, backend, and QA'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain richly ('PM, Frontend, Backend, Mobile, and QA agents on complex projects via CLI') but the actual verbs are limited to 'coordinating' and 'workflow guidance' rather than a list of multiple distinct concrete actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

Clearly states both what ('Guide for coordinating ... agents on complex projects via CLI') and an explicit when ('Use for manual step-by-step coordination and workflow guidance'), though the when could be more trigger-specific.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant terms like 'manual step-by-step coordination' and 'multi-agent', but these lean on ecosystem role jargon (PM/Frontend/Backend/Mobile/QA) rather than natural phrases a user would say, and common synonyms are missing.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (manual multi-agent coordination across named specialist roles) that is mostly distinct from the related automated orchestrator skill, with only minor overlap risk.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
first-fluke/oh-my-agent
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.