clay-core-workflow-b
Execute Clay secondary workflow: Core Workflow B. Use when implementing secondary use case, or complementing primary workflow. Trigger with phrases like "clay secondary workflow", "secondary task with clay".
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills --skill clay-core-workflow-b52
Quality
27%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.72xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/saas-packs/clay-pack/skills/clay-core-workflow-b/SKILL.mdDiscovery
32%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description fails to communicate what the skill actually does, relying entirely on placeholder-like language ('Core Workflow B', 'secondary use case') that provides no actionable information. While it includes trigger phrases and a 'Use when' clause structurally, the content is too abstract for Claude to make informed skill selection decisions.
Suggestions
Replace 'Core Workflow B' and 'secondary use case' with specific, concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Enriches contact data with company information, validates email addresses, appends social profiles').
Add natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as domain-specific keywords related to Clay's functionality (e.g., 'enrich leads', 'data enrichment', 'contact lookup').
Define what makes this 'secondary' - describe the specific scenarios or data states that distinguish this workflow from the primary one.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague, abstract language like 'Core Workflow B', 'secondary use case', and 'complementing primary workflow' without describing any concrete actions or capabilities. No actual tasks or operations are specified. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Has a 'Use when' clause which addresses the 'when' question, but the 'what' is essentially undefined - 'Core Workflow B' and 'secondary use case' provide no meaningful information about what the skill actually does. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some trigger phrases like 'clay secondary workflow' and 'secondary task with clay', but these are artificial constructs rather than natural terms users would say. Missing domain-specific keywords that describe what the workflow actually does. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Extremely generic terms like 'secondary workflow' and 'complementing primary workflow' could apply to virtually any secondary process. Without describing actual capabilities, this would conflict with any other secondary/complementary skill. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is a template or skeleton with no actual content - all code blocks are empty placeholders and the 'Error Handling' section is mislabeled (it's a comparison table). While the structure and organization suggest a reasonable approach, the skill provides zero actionable guidance for executing 'Core Workflow B' with Clay.
Suggestions
Replace all placeholder code comments with actual executable TypeScript code showing real Clay API calls and implementations
Add genuine error handling code and recovery steps instead of the comparison table currently in the 'Error Handling' section
Include specific validation checkpoints between steps (e.g., 'Verify API response status before proceeding to Step 2')
Provide at least one complete, working example with real input/output values that demonstrates the workflow end-to-end
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The structure is reasonably lean, but the content is essentially placeholder text with no actual implementation details. The comparison table and section headers add structure without substance. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | All code blocks contain only comments like '// Step 1 implementation' with no actual executable code. There are no concrete commands, real examples, or copy-paste ready snippets. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While steps are numbered, they contain no actual instructions. There are no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops for error recovery, and the 'Error Handling' section is actually a comparison table with no error handling guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references external resources and related skills appropriately, but the main content itself is empty placeholders. The structure suggests good organization but delivers no actual content to disclose. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.