CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

init-workspace-verification

Verify init completeness.

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 ./instructions/r2/core/skills/init-workspace-verification/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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 disciplined, audit-grade checklist: terse, artifact-anchored, and organized into scannable phases with an explicit pass/fail rule and a catch-up feedback loop. Its main gaps are undefined pass-criteria on a few fuzzy checkpoints and a slightly bloated core_concepts section, plus no reference split despite four separable concerns.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is a lean, telegraphic checklist ("DEPENDENCIES.md — direct dependencies only (project, package, version)") with zero explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Not 5 because the core_concepts section ("All Rosetta prep steps MUST be FULLY completed, load-context skill loaded and fully executed") adds almost nothing beyond what the process section implies, and stray all-caps emphasis pads a few lines.

4 / 5

Actionability

Most checkpoints carry concrete, checkable criteria — "3-4 levels", "frontmatter + single ACQUIRE, zero inline logic", "each pattern in 2+ locations", "exactly one of install, upgrade, plugin". Not 5 because several pass-conditions are asserted without a method or example ("correct scope", "INDEX.md is consistent", "complement — no duplication"), leaving the verifier to invent its own standard.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

"Run every checkpoint. Each must pass or have documented justification" establishes an explicit pass rule, and "CATCH-UP: For failed checkpoints — identify owning skill, execute, re-verify" is a genuine validate→fix→retry feedback loop over a numbered 28-item checklist. The sequence (checkpoints → catch-up → assumptions revalidation → deprecation notice) matches the anchor-5 pattern of clear sequence plus explicit validation and error recovery.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized tagged sections, fully self-contained, and no nested references — and since no bundle files exist, nothing referenced is missing. Not 5 because the ~80-line body exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill carve-out and mixes four distinct concerns inline (checkpoint list, catch-up procedure, assumptions revalidation rules, deprecated artifacts) that a references/ split could serve; not 3 because structure is clear and nothing is buried.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

28%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 a three-word placeholder: it names the domain and nothing else. It omits the skill's actual capabilities (28-checkpoint completeness audit, gap catch-up, assumptions revalidation, deprecated-artifact notification) and any trigger guidance, making it both uninformative for routing and prone to overlap with other verification skills. This is the weakest part of an otherwise strong skill.

Suggestions

Expand the description to name the concrete actions, e.g.: "Consolidates all init-phase outputs into a single 28-checkpoint completeness audit, runs catch-up for failed checkpoints via the owning skills, revalidates ASSUMPTIONS.md entries, and flags deprecated artifacts."

Add an explicit trigger clause: "Use as the final phase of workspace initialization, when init documents (TECHSTACK.md, CODEMAP.md, DEPENDENCIES.md, etc.) have been generated and need a completeness audit before sign-off."

Include the natural keywords users would actually say — "workspace initialization", "init audit", "completeness check", the named document artifacts — so the skill is distinguishable from generic verification/validation skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description offers only a single generic verb ("Verify") over a bare domain ("init completeness"), matching the anchor 'names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'. It does not list any of the concrete actions the body actually contains (consolidating outputs, running a 28-checkpoint audit, catch-up, revalidating assumptions), so it cannot reach anchor 3.

2 / 5

Completeness

It gives a vague 'what' ("Verify init completeness") and entirely omits 'when' — the anchor-2 pattern. Anchor 3 is unavailable because it requires a clear 'what', and the judging guideline caps any description missing a 'Use when...' clause at 3 regardless.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Only "init", "verify", and "completeness" appear — generic keywords with none of the natural phrases a user would say ("workspace initialization", "final phase", "completeness audit", "checklist", named artifacts like TECHSTACK.md). This sits at anchor 2; anchor 3 requires at least some genuinely relevant, specific keywords naming the artifacts involved.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"init completeness" does scope the skill to a specific init-phase niche, but with no distinguishing trigger phrases it could still overlap with other verification, validation, or init-related skills — anchor 3. It is more scoped than anchor-2 examples like 'Helps with document files', but lacks the distinct triggers needed for 4.

3 / 5

Total

9

/

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

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

griddynamics/rosetta

Path

instructions/r2/core/skills/init-workspace-verification/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.