CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

scout

Evaluate URLs and tools — check vault coverage, assess relevance, recommend save or skip

34

Quality

30%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/scout/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

COG Scout Skill

Purpose

Lightweight URL/tool triage that sits between "ignore" and /url-dump. Evaluates whether a URL or tool is worth saving or skipping — checking existing vault coverage, assessing relevance to the user's profile and interests, and recommending a clear next action.

When to Invoke

  • User wants to evaluate a URL or tool before committing to a full save
  • User says "scout this", "evaluate this", "should I save this?", "is this relevant?"
  • User shares one or more URLs and wants a quick relevance assessment
  • User mentions a tool/service name and wants to know if it's worth investigating

Agent Mode Awareness

Check agent_mode in 00-inbox/MY-PROFILE.md frontmatter:

  • If agent_mode: team — delegate vault scanning and web fetching to parallel sub-agents (one for vault search, one for content fetch/analysis). Combine results for recommendation.
  • If agent_mode: solo (default) — handle all scanning and analysis directly in the conversation. No delegation.

Pre-Flight Check

Before executing, check for user profile:

  1. Look for 00-inbox/MY-PROFILE.md and 00-inbox/MY-INTERESTS.md in the vault
  2. If NOT found:
    Welcome to COG! Scout works best with a profile for relevance matching.
    
    Would you like to run /onboarding first, or should I evaluate with general criteria?
  3. If found:
    • Read MY-PROFILE.md for active projects and role
    • Read MY-INTERESTS.md for topic areas
    • Read 00-inbox/MY-INTEGRATIONS.md for active integrations (check if web-fetch and web-search are available)

Boundary with /url-dump

Scout evaluates ("should I save this?"). URL-dump saves ("save this now").

  • Scout checks existing coverage, assesses relevance, and recommends an action
  • If the recommendation is Save, scout hands off to /url-dump with pre-filled category
  • Users who already know they want to save should use /url-dump directly

Process Flow

1. Accept Input

Accept one or more of:

  • URL(s): Direct links to evaluate
  • Tool/service name(s): Will search for the tool first
  • Mixed: Combination of URLs and names

Prompt (if no input provided):

What URL(s) or tool(s) would you like me to evaluate?
(You can paste URLs, tool names, or a mix)

Batch mode: Multiple URLs/names in one invocation are processed together with a summary table at the end.

2. Vault Coverage Check

For each URL or tool name, search the entire vault for existing coverage.

Search strategy:

  • Extract domain from URL (e.g., github.com/owner/repo → search for repo name)
  • Search for tool/service name across the whole vault (grep for domain, repo name, tool name)
  • Match against URL strings in frontmatter (url: fields) and inline links

If found:

🔍 Existing coverage found for [name]:
- [file path] — saved [date], category: [category]
- [file path] — mentioned in [context]

Want me to check if an update is needed, or skip this one?

3. Content Fetch & Analysis

If URL provided and web-fetch is active:

  • Fetch the URL content using WebFetch
  • Extract: title, description, content type, author, date

If tool name provided (no URL):

  • Use WebSearch to find the tool's primary page
  • Fetch and analyze the top result

Content type detection:

  • Tool/Service: Software, SaaS, API, library, framework
  • Article/Blog: Long-form content, tutorial, opinion piece
  • Repository: GitHub/GitLab repo (extract stars, last commit, language)
  • Research: Paper, study, academic content
  • News: Industry news, announcement
  • Reference: Documentation, spec, standard

4. Relevance Assessment

Score relevance against user context:

Profile Match (from MY-PROFILE.md):

  • Does it relate to an active project? Which one?
  • Does it align with the user's role?
  • Does it fit the user's tech stack?

Interest Match (from MY-INTERESTS.md):

  • Does it match any declared interest topics?
  • How directly relevant is it?

Quality Signals:

  • For repos: stars, recent activity, maintainer health
  • For tools: pricing model, maturity, adoption
  • For articles: author credibility, publication quality, recency
  • For all: uniqueness vs. what's already in the vault

5. Recommendation

Based on analysis, recommend one of two actions:

Save — Worth adding to the knowledge base

✅ SAVE — [Title/Name]
Category: [suggested category for url-dump]
Relevance: [High/Medium] — [why it matters]
Projects: [affected project(s) if any]

Shall I hand off to /url-dump to save it?

Skip — Not relevant or not worth the time

⏭️ SKIP — [Title/Name]
Reason: [clear explanation — wrong stack, low quality, already covered, irrelevant to interests]

6. Batch Summary (for multiple items)

When processing multiple URLs/tools, end with a summary table:

## Scout Summary

| # | Item | Verdict | Reason |
|---|------|---------|--------|
| 1 | [Name 1] | ✅ Save | [brief reason] |
| 2 | [Name 2] | ⏭️ Skip | [brief reason] |

**Actions:**
- [X] items ready to save via /url-dump

7. Execute Follow-up Actions

Based on user confirmation:

  • Save items: Hand off to /url-dump with pre-filled category suggestion
  • Skip items: No action needed

Fallback Behavior

ScenarioBehavior
web-fetch unavailableEvaluate based on URL structure, domain reputation, and vault search only. Note that content wasn't fetched.
web-search unavailableFor tool-name inputs (no URL), ask the user for a direct URL instead. For URL inputs, proceed normally — web-search is not needed.
No user profileEvaluate with general quality/relevance criteria, skip personalized relevance scoring
URL is paywalledNote limitation, evaluate based on available preview and metadata
Tool not found via searchAsk user for more context or a direct URL

Uncertainty Handling

  • High confidence: Clear relevance match or clear irrelevance — give direct recommendation
  • Medium confidence: Partial match — present pros/cons, let user decide
  • Low confidence: Can't determine relevance — explain what's unclear, ask user for context

Integration with Other Skills

Downstream

  • Save → hands off to /url-dump with pre-filled category

Upstream

  • /daily-brief may surface new tools/services → user can run /scout to evaluate
  • /auto-research may discover tools during research → scout can triage them

Success Metrics

  • Quick triage (< 1 minute for single URL in solo mode)
  • Clear, actionable recommendations
  • Accurate vault coverage detection (no duplicate saves)
  • Relevance scoring matches user expectations
  • Smooth handoff to /url-dump when saving

Philosophy

Scout embodies COG's "evaluate before you accumulate" principle:

  • Not everything deserves a bookmark — be selective
  • Existing coverage should be surfaced before creating duplicates
  • Binary save/skip keeps decisions fast and avoids half-measures
  • Clear recommendations reduce decision fatigue
Repository
huytieu/COG-second-brain
Last updated
Created

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.