CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

senior-engineering

Engineering principles for building software like a senior engineer. Load when tackling non-trivial development work, architecting systems, reviewing code, or orchestrating multi-agent builds. Covers planning, delivery, quality gates, and LLM-specific patterns.

64

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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 well-organized, token-efficient principles manifesto with a clear phased workflow and validation checklist, though its actionability is diluted by abstract aphorisms and the absence of concrete examples.

Suggestions

Pair the abstract aphorisms ("Boring > Clever", "Optimize for Delete") with one concrete code/config example each to lift actionability.

Add a short runnable example or template for the LLM orchestration handoff contract (inputs, outputs, success criteria) so that section instructs rather than describes.

Consider moving the Ownership & Accountability philosophy into a separate reference file to keep the core build workflow tighter.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean bullet-form throughout with no filler paragraphs and no explanations of concepts Claude already knows; every line is a terse directive that assumes competence.

3 / 3

Actionability

It offers concrete directives and a real Quality Gates checklist, but these are mixed with abstract philosophy ("Boring > Clever", "Strong Opinions, Weakly Held") and no executable code or commands, so guidance is actionable but incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Work is phased clearly (Before Writing Code → During Build → Quality Gates) with an explicit validation checklist ("Before Declaring Done") and feedback-loop principles like "Fail Fast, Surface Early".

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A self-contained principles doc with well-organized, clearly-headed sections and no nested external references; no bundle files are needed, so the single-file structure is appropriate.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

67%

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 has an explicit Load-when trigger and clearly states both purpose and scope, but its actions are abstract categories rather than concrete operations and its trigger terms miss common user phrasings.

Suggestions

Replace abstract categories ("architecting systems") with concrete verbs users say, e.g. "refactor code, design systems, review PRs, orchestrate multi-agent builds".

Add common trigger terms like "refactor", "debug", "write tests", or "plan a feature" to broaden natural-language coverage.

Sharpen the niche by leading with the most distinctive capability (multi-agent orchestration / LLM-specific patterns) before the general engineering framing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the senior-engineering domain and several activities ("architecting systems, reviewing code, or orchestrating multi-agent builds") but these are abstract categories rather than a list of concrete operations, falling short of the multi-action level-3 anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both what ("Engineering principles... Covers planning, delivery, quality gates, and LLM-specific patterns") and when via an explicit "Load when tackling..." trigger clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant natural phrases like "reviewing code" and "orchestrating multi-agent builds", but omits common variations a user would actually say ("refactor", "build a feature", "debug", "write tests").

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The multi-agent/LLM-orchestration framing gives it a niche, but the broad "building software like a senior engineer" scope could still overlap with general coding skills.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

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
jdrhyne/agent-skills
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.