CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

team-brief

Generate daily team intelligence brief by cross-referencing GitHub, Linear, Slack, PostHog, meetings, and braindumps with two-way Linear sync-back

58

Quality

68%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/team-brief/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

73%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 content is a thorough, well-sequenced operational playbook with strong workflow clarity, explicit safety/validation for the destructive Linear write-backs, and clean one-level bundle references. Its main weakness is conciseness — significant redundancy between Phase 3 and the Synthesis Rules — with minor progressive-disclosure gaps from large inlined reference blocks.

Suggestions

Consolidate the 23-item Synthesis Rules into the Phase 3 cross-reference steps (or move them to a reference file) to remove the major source of redundancy.

Move the full Content Structure spec and Slack message templates into the existing references files, keeping only a concise outline in the body.

Tighten the Voice & Tone section to a compact do/don't list so the body stays within a leaner token budget.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~480-line body is mostly valuable but includes padding: the 23-item Synthesis Rules largely restate the Phase 3 cross-reference steps, and the Voice & Tone / Slack-format sections are lengthy; it could be tightened without losing clarity, placing it just below the efficient anchor.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, mostly executable guidance — named MCP tools (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__update_issue), exact HackMD API calls with curl payloads, and explicit safety rules — with only minor gaps from uncustomized placeholders like '[CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo]'.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear phased sequence (Phase 1 → 2 → 3 → 3.5 → 3.7 → 4) with timing estimates, explicit validation/safety checkpoints (duplicate-prevention, never-transition-backward, status-transition safety), fallback behavior, and error-handling feedback loops for the batch/destructive Linear write-backs.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with well-signaled one-level-deep references to three real bundle files (agent-prompts.md, brief-frontmatter.md, publish-templates.md) for bulk detail, but the body still inlines large reference-like blocks (23 synthesis rules, full content-structure spec), leaving minor organization gaps.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 specific and highly distinct, clearly conveying what the skill does and over which integrations, but it omits an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause and leans on product names rather than natural user phrasing. Completeness and trigger-term quality are the weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger phrases, e.g. 'Use when the user says team brief, team update, what did we ship, or wants cross-referenced GitHub/Linear/Slack intelligence for standup prep.'

Surface natural user-facing keywords (team brief, standup prep, what did we ship) in the description itself rather than only in the body.

Tighten the action list into clearer verb phrases so the breadth of capabilities reads comprehensively in one sentence.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and several concrete actions — 'Generate daily team intelligence brief by cross-referencing GitHub, Linear, Slack, PostHog, meetings, and braindumps with two-way Linear sync-back' lists multiple specific capabilities, but the verb set is narrow (generate, cross-reference, sync) leaving minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

It has a clear 'what' (generate a cross-referenced intelligence brief with Linear sync-back) but no explicit 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger clause, so per the rubric guideline completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Coverage relies on product/integration names (GitHub, Linear, Slack, PostHog) rather than the natural phrases users actually say; the natural trigger terms ('team brief', 'what did we ship', 'standup prep') live in the body, not the description, so common variations are missing.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is sharply defined by the specific integration set plus two-way Linear sync-back, making it unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill and giving it minimal conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

Validation15 / 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
huytieu/COG-second-brain
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.