CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

frame-a-proposal

Frame a new design proposal (RFC-shape) under proposals/ — problem before solution, named beneficiary and observable change, real alternatives, honest drawbacks, and a live open-questions backlog. Read when asked to frame a proposal, write an RFC, propose a design, pitch a change, draft a PRD-style design doc, or open a design proposal for review. Do NOT read to record a decision after it is accepted (use record-a-decision), to write an implementation spec (use write-a-spec), to write a postmortem (use write-a-postmortem), or to review or critique an existing design (use review-a-design).

Quality

95%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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.

A strong, gate-driven process skill: every step carries concrete tool invocations, verbatim templates, and explicit validation with a feedback loop. The only real cost is token efficiency — the core gate and human-authority messages are stated two to three times over, which could be tightened without losing force.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Nearly all content is skill-specific craft rather than general knowledge, but the 'don't draft Design before framing' gate and 'acceptance is a human act' messages are each repeated across the intro, Step 1/Step 9, and Non-goals, and rhetorical framing like 'The failure this skill exists to prevent' could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance throughout: concrete MCP calls (`write({ document: { path: "proposals/0007-async-export-pipeline.md", template: "proposal" } })`, `exec("ls -A proposals/")`, `audit({ path: ... })`) plus verbatim copy-paste templates for the framing block, alternatives structure, frontmatter, and recap.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 10-step (0–9) process with an explicit STOP gate requiring user confirmation before drafting, a Step 8 validation checklist ('audit returns clean — fix every finding'), and a defined error-recovery feedback loop — the top anchor's pattern exactly.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Single self-contained file with no bundle files present; content is appropriately placed inline (a process skill's templates and gates belong in the main file), sections are clearly headed and navigable, and nothing needs external references.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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.

An exemplary description: concrete deliverable components, exhaustive natural-language triggers including RFC/PRD/pitch synonyms, explicit use-when guidance, and negative triggers that sharply delimit it from sibling skills. No fluff or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete deliverable components — 'problem before solution, named beneficiary and observable change, real alternatives, honest drawbacks, and a live open-questions backlog' — giving comprehensive, non-abstract coverage of what the skill produces.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ('Frame a new design proposal (RFC-shape) under proposals/…') and when ('Read when asked to frame a proposal, write an RFC…') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger coverage is comprehensive with natural synonyms users would actually say: 'frame a proposal', 'write an RFC', 'propose a design', 'pitch a change', 'draft a PRD-style design doc', 'open a design proposal for review'.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with minimal conflict risk: negative triggers ('Do NOT read to record a decision… (use record-a-decision), to write an implementation spec (use write-a-spec)…') explicitly disambiguate all four sibling skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

inkeep/open-knowledge

Path

packages/server/assets/skills/packs/software-lifecycle/frame-a-proposal/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.