CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

025-quality-attribute-discovery

Use when a problem under exploration needs its quality attributes (non-functional requirements) identified and prioritized before architecture and design begin. This should trigger when an issue's Quality Attribute Discovery point of view needs evaluation, or when a maintainer directly asks to discover and prioritize candidate quality attributes for a problem, before any ADR or design work starts. Part of Plinth Toolkit

58

Quality

66%

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 ./skills/025-quality-attribute-discovery/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill body is well-structured with clean progressive disclosure to a single reference, but its guidance is somewhat redundant across sections and lacks a concrete output template or explicit validation checkpoint. Tightening the repeated material and adding a prioritization/output format would raise actionability and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Consolidate the redundant 'What is covered', Constraints, and Workflow sections so each point appears once, reducing token cost without losing clarity.

Add a concrete output template or example for the prioritized discovery list (e.g., a table of quality attribute, evidence source, stakeholder impact, risk) to make actionability fully concrete.

Insert an explicit validation checkpoint in the workflow, such as verifying each candidate quality attribute is backed by a cited artifact before prioritizing, to move workflow clarity from implicit to enforced.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the 'What is covered', Constraints, and Workflow sections restate the same points (identify, prioritize, stop before architecture), so it could be tightened; matches the score-2 anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete MUST/MUST NOT constraints give specific grounding sources and a flag-the-gap rule, but there is no output template for the discovery list and 'prioritize by stakeholder impact and risk' lacks a concrete method or scale, leaving key details missing per the score-2 anchor.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-step sequence is present with a flag-gap feedback mechanism, but there is no explicit validation checkpoint (e.g., verifying each candidate is backed by cited evidence), so checkpoints are implicit rather than enforced.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview that signals a single one-level-deep reference (references/025-quality-attribute-discovery.md, a real file) via both a MUST-read constraint and a Reference link, matching the score-3 anchor for clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 complete and well-scoped, clearly stating both capability and trigger conditions with a distinctive niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term diversity, which relies partly on the skill's own name rather than a broad set of natural user phrasings.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and concrete actions ('quality attributes (non-functional requirements) identified and prioritized', 'discover and prioritize candidate quality attributes'), but offers only two repeated operations rather than a list of multiple distinct concrete actions, matching the score-2 anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (identify and prioritize quality attributes) and when via a clear 'Use when...' clause plus a maintainer-trigger condition, satisfying the score-3 anchor for both what and when with explicit triggers.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms a maintainer would say ('quality attributes', 'non-functional requirements', 'ADR or design work'), but leans on the skill's own proper noun ('Quality Attribute Discovery point of view') as a trigger and misses common variations, so coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche scoped to discovery 'before any ADR or design work starts' with distinct triggers (quality attributes / non-functional requirements), making unintended triggering of sibling skills unlikely.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
jabrena/plinth
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.