CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

speckit-plan

Execute the implementation planning workflow using the plan template to generate design artifacts.

53

Quality

60%

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/speckit-plan/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 is a well-sequenced, highly actionable planning workflow with concrete scripts, files, and validation gates. Its main weakness is the near-verbatim duplication of the extension-hook block, which hurts conciseness and could be factored into a shared reference.

Suggestions

De-duplicate the extension-hook handling: define the hook rules once and reference them from both Pre-Execution Checks and step 5 instead of repeating ~30 lines verbatim.

Add an explicit fix-and-retry loop for gate/clarification failures (e.g., "On ERROR: resolve the violation, then re-run the Constitution Check before proceeding") to push workflow_clarity toward 5.

Move the large hook output templates into a referenced file (e.g., references/hooks.md) and link to it, improving progressive_disclosure and conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean and assumes Claude's competence, but the extension-hook logic is duplicated almost verbatim between "Pre-Execution Checks" and step 5 (~30 repeated lines) that could be tightened or factored out.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance dominates: exact script path (`.specify/scripts/bash/setup-plan.sh --json`), named files (FEATURE_SPEC, IMPL_PLAN, constitution.md), exact output artifacts, and a precise dot-to-hyphen command transformation, with only minor gaps in artifact content format.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear numbered sequence (Setup → Load context → Execute → Stop/report → Hooks) with prerequisites and validation gates ("ERROR if violations unjustified", "Re-evaluate Constitution Check post-design") is present, though explicit fix-and-retry feedback loops are only implied rather than spelled out.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, so the ~150-line body is self-contained; section structure (User Input, Pre-Execution Checks, Outline, Phases, Key rules) is well-organized with clear headers, though the verbose hook output templates are inlined rather than split out.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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 is clear and third-person with a defined niche, but it lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and only names high-level actions. Adding concrete trigger phrases and one or two more specific outputs would lift the completeness and trigger-term scores.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when starting implementation planning for a spec-kit feature or when the user asks to generate a plan/design artifacts."

List 1-2 more concrete outputs (e.g., "data-model.md, contracts/, quickstart.md") to move specificity from 3 toward 4.

Include a natural synonym or file extension users say (e.g., "implementation plan", "spec plan") to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Phrases like "Execute the implementation planning workflow" and "generate design artifacts" name the domain and 1-2 actions, but the actions are high-level and not a comprehensive list of concrete capabilities.

3 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (execute planning workflow to generate design artifacts), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"implementation planning", "plan template", and "design artifacts" are relevant keywords a user might say, but common variations and synonyms (e.g., "spec", "architecture", "roadmap") are missing.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The pairing of "implementation planning workflow" with "plan template" and "design artifacts" carves a distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against closely related planning skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
g14wx/staffSync
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.