conductor-status

Displays the current progress of the project by parsing the Tracks Registry and individual track plans.

Quality

60%

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 ./skills/conductor-status/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

85%

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-structured, highly actionable instruction-only skill with clear sequencing and validation checkpoints. Its main weakness is the generic Operational Standards boilerplate, which adds tokens that are not specific to the status task.

Suggestions

Trim the generic 'Operational Standards' guidance (Interaction Protocol, Sequential Questioning) to only what is specific to status reporting, or move shared conduct rules to a referenced conventions file.

Consider a compact worked example of the expected status output format so the deliverable shape is unambiguous.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is largely lean and task-focused, but the 'Operational Standards' section (Interaction Protocol, Sequential Questioning) carries generic agent-conduct boilerplate that is not specific to a status-overview task and could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	It gives concrete, executable guidance: default paths (conductor/tracks.md, conductor/tracks/<track_id>/plan.md), exact parsing patterns, exact checkbox markers, and a precise output specification including the progress format tasks_completed/tasks_total (percentage_completed%).	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The process is clearly sequenced (Handshake -> Read -> Parse -> Present) with explicit validation checkpoints (verify linked files exist, HALT on missing files, self-correct-once on command failure) and conditional branching, fitting the clear-sequence-with-validation anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	It is a self-contained single-file skill with no bundle files present, organized into clean headed sections with no nested references; per the simple-skills scoring note this earns a 3 for well-organized, single-level content.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

35%

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 states the skill's single purpose but relies on internal Conductor jargon and omits any explicit 'Use when' trigger guidance. Adding natural user-facing trigger terms would materially improve trigger quality, completeness, and distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when the user asks for a project status, progress summary, or overview of Conductor tracks and tasks.'

Replace or supplement jargon ('Tracks Registry', 'track plans') with terms users actually say, such as 'project status', 'progress report', 'task summary', or 'what's left to do'.

State the concrete deliverable more specifically, e.g. 'Generates a status report showing completed, in-progress, and pending tasks with overall progress percentage.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (project progress) and concrete actions ('Displays', 'parsing the Tracks Registry and individual track plans') but is not comprehensive, matching the anchor for a domain plus some actions rather than multiple specific concrete actions.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill does but provides no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 2 per the judging guidelines.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'Tracks Registry' and 'track plans' are internal jargon for a bespoke Conductor system rather than natural phrases a user would say; there is no coverage of common user-facing variations.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche ('Tracks Registry', 'track plans') is specific enough to limit conflict, but distinctiveness rests on proprietary jargon without broader natural triggers, matching the 'somewhat specific but could overlap' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: gemini-cli-extensions/conductor
Path: skills/conductor-status/SKILL.md
Commit: fb6212e

Reviewed: 4 days 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.