CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

knowledge-consolidation

Build frameworks from scattered insights across all braindumps and notes

Quality

59%

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 ./.agents/skills/knowledge-consolidation/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

47%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 maximally concise but is a delegation shim rather than a skill: it contains no task content, only pointers to a playbook and rules file that live outside the bundle and cannot be navigated from here. Actionability, workflow clarity, and progressive disclosure all suffer because the actual instructions are entirely absent from SKILL.md.

Suggestions

Inline the core workflow of the skill into SKILL.md — at minimum a short overview of what "build frameworks from scattered insights" concretely involves — so the skill is self-contained instead of a pointer to `.claude/skills/knowledge-consolidation/SKILL.md`.

If detailed material must stay separate, move it into the bundle (e.g. `references/playbook.md`) and link it explicitly with one-level-deep, well-signaled references so navigation does not depend on files outside the skill directory.

Add at least one validation or verification checkpoint (e.g. confirming the referenced playbook file exists before executing, or verifying the built framework covers the source braindumps) to raise workflow clarity above its current gap-riddled state.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is two sentences with zero padding — "Read `.claude/skills/knowledge-consolidation/SKILL.md` and execute it exactly as written" and one substitution rule — assuming Claude's competence with every token earning its place. It matches the lean/efficient anchor exactly; there is nothing to trim and no over-explanation.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete file paths are given, but the body contains none of the actual steps for the skill's core task — "Read ... SKILL.md and execute it exactly as written" delegates everything, so the specific steps to execute are missing from the skill itself. This matches the anchor for minimal concrete guidance with high-level pointers but missing steps; it is not score 3 because no partial task guidance exists inline at all, though the pointers themselves are specific enough to sit above score 1.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A rough sequence is implied (read the playbook, execute it, then follow `.agents/rules/cog.md`), but the real workflow lives in files outside this bundle, steps are poorly defined here, and there is no validation of any kind. This matches the anchor for a rough sequence with many gaps and absent validation; it is not score 3 because this file itself lists no concrete task steps.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a pointer-only shell: every reference (`.claude/skills/knowledge-consolidation/SKILL.md`, `.agents/rules/cog.md`, `.agents/agents/<name>.md`) points outside the skill bundle, and no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist, so the actual content is buried elsewhere with no overview inline. This matches the anchor for minimal structure with buried references; it is not score 1 because the references are explicitly signaled and this file itself does not nest them two levels deep.

2 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

50%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 names a clear, narrowly scoped task (building frameworks from braindumps and notes), which gives it reasonable specificity and distinctiveness. Its main weaknesses are the complete absence of any "when to use" trigger guidance and thin keyword coverage with no synonyms, both of which cap most dimensions at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause, e.g. "Use when the user mentions braindumps, scattered notes, or wants to consolidate or synthesize insights into a framework."

Enumerate 1-2 more concrete actions to raise specificity, e.g. "Build frameworks from scattered insights across braindumps and notes: cluster related themes, identify recurring patterns, and synthesize them into a unified structure."

Include natural user synonyms such as "consolidate", "synthesize", and "organize notes" as trigger terms so the skill matches how users actually phrase the request.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Build frameworks" names a single action and "scattered insights across all braindumps and notes" names the domain, matching the anchor for domain plus 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage. It is above score 2 because a concrete action and a specific domain are stated, but below 4 because only one, fairly abstract action is listed.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description has a clear "what" ("Build frameworks from scattered insights across all braindumps and notes") but no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not score 4 because the "when" is entirely absent rather than merely implicit-and-weak, and clearly not score 2 since the "what" is specific.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like "braindumps", "notes", "insights", and "frameworks" are relevant and somewhat natural, but common user variations such as "consolidate", "synthesize", or "organize notes" are missing, matching the anchor for some relevant keywords with missing variations. It is not score 4 because keyword coverage is thin, and not score 2 because the terms are domain-specific rather than generic.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"braindumps" gives it a somewhat distinct niche, but "build frameworks" and "notes" overlap broadly with summarization, note-taking, and knowledge-management skills, matching the anchor for somewhat specific but with overlap risk. It is not score 4 because the generic "frameworks/insights" vocabulary could plausibly trigger related organization or synthesis 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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

huytieu/COG-second-brain

Path

.agents/skills/knowledge-consolidation/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.