CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

write-a-spec

Scope a feature end to end and write an implementation spec under specs/ from an accepted proposal — current-system mapping, goals/non-goals, a Decision Log for one-way-door choices, a live Open Questions backlog, and a real migration + test plan. Read when asked to write a spec, scope this feature, turn this proposal into a spec, plan the implementation, or break this into tasks. Do NOT fire on frame a proposal or write the PRD (sibling frame-a-proposal — a PRD frames a change before it is accepted; this skill starts once one is), record a decision or write the ADR (record-a-decision), write a postmortem (write-a-postmortem), or review this design (review-a-design) — those are separate skills. Complements the platform open-knowledge skill; does not replace it.

75

Quality

94%

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

88%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 tightly engineered process skill: concrete commands and templates, an explicitly gated multi-step workflow with validation feedback loops, and clear sectioning. The only soft spot is mild rhetorical padding and the absence of any progressive-disclosure file split.

Suggestions

Trim motivational framing sentences (e.g. 'A spec is the contract between...', 'is a liability — it reads authoritative while being unfounded') to tighten the conciseness score toward 5.

Consider extracting the Decision Log and Open Questions block templates into a short reference file referenced once from Step 6/7 to introduce a one-level-deep progressive-disclosure split.

The autonomy-mode table and Step 0 routing prose are slightly redundant with the Mandatory execution order list; consolidating could reduce length without losing clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Largely efficient craft guidance Claude would not already know, but scattered rhetorical framing ('A spec is the contract between...', 'is a liability — it reads authoritative while being unfounded') could be trimmed without losing the instruction.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable OpenKnowledge verbs with real arguments — exec("ls -A proposals/"), write({ document: { path, template } }), audit({ path }), search({ query }) — plus copy-ready YAML frontmatter and Decision Log / Open Questions markdown templates covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A numbered 12-step (Step 0–11) mandatory execution order with explicit HARD GATE checkpoints ('do not create spec.md until the parent-proposal question is resolved', 'do not draft the proposed Design until the current-system map is written'), a Supervised STOP gate, and a Step 10 validate-and-fix feedback loop.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist; all content lives inline in a ~290-line SKILL.md, but it is well organized into one section per step with clear headers and no nested references. The Decision Log / Open Questions templates could plausibly be split out, but keeping them inline is reasonable for an integral process.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

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: it states concrete deliverables, gives natural trigger phrases, and explicitly fences off sibling skills to avoid misfires. No meaningful gaps.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'current-system mapping, goals/non-goals, a Decision Log for one-way-door choices, a live Open Questions backlog, and a real migration + test plan' — giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill produces.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (scope a feature and write an implementation spec under specs/ with the listed artifacts) and 'when' (the 'Read when...' clause with concrete trigger phrases).

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Read when asked to write a spec, scope this feature, turn this proposal into a spec, plan the implementation, or break this into tasks' covers the natural phrases a user would actually say when they need this skill.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'Do NOT fire on...' clause explicitly disambiguates frame-a-proposal, record-a-decision, write-a-postmortem, and review-a-design, giving it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk.

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: 1 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
inkeep/open-knowledge
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.