impact-analysis-helper
Impact Analysis Helper - Auto-activating skill for Enterprise Workflows. Triggers on: impact analysis helper, impact analysis helper Part of the Enterprise Workflows skill category.
31
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
87%
1.01xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/20-enterprise-workflows/impact-analysis-helper/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%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 is essentially a placeholder with no substantive content. It fails on every dimension: it names no concrete actions, provides no natural trigger terms, answers neither 'what' nor 'when', and is indistinguishable from any generic enterprise or analysis skill. The repeated trigger term suggests auto-generated boilerplate rather than a thoughtfully crafted description.
Suggestions
Define what the skill actually does with specific actions, e.g., 'Evaluates the downstream effects of code changes, identifies affected components, and assesses risk levels for proposed modifications.'
Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms like 'impact analysis', 'change impact', 'what will this change affect', 'dependency check', 'risk assessment'.
Remove the redundant duplicate trigger term and replace with varied, natural phrases users would actually say when needing this capability.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description provides no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Impact Analysis Helper' is a name, not a description of capabilities. There are no verbs describing what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. The description only states the skill name, a redundant trigger, and a category label without any functional detail or usage guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'impact analysis helper' repeated twice. These are not natural terms users would say — users would more likely say things like 'analyze impact', 'change impact', 'dependency analysis', or 'risk assessment'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is extremely generic — 'Enterprise Workflows' and 'Impact Analysis Helper' could overlap with many skills involving analysis, workflows, or enterprise tools. There are no distinct triggers or domain-specific details to differentiate it. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an empty placeholder that provides no actionable content whatsoever. It repeatedly references 'impact analysis helper' without ever defining what impact analysis entails, how to perform it, what tools or frameworks to use, or what outputs to produce. It fails on every dimension of the rubric.
Suggestions
Define what 'impact analysis' actually means in this context and provide a concrete workflow (e.g., 1. Identify change scope, 2. Map dependencies, 3. Assess risk levels, 4. Document findings) with specific templates or output formats.
Add executable examples such as a sample impact analysis matrix, a risk scoring rubric, or a concrete template that Claude can populate for a given change request.
Include validation checkpoints (e.g., 'Verify all downstream dependencies are identified before proceeding to risk assessment') to make the workflow robust.
Remove all boilerplate sections (Purpose, When to Use, Example Triggers) that merely restate the skill name and replace them with actual instructional content.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and boilerplate. It repeats 'impact analysis helper' numerous times without adding any substantive information. Every section restates the same vague concept with no actual content Claude couldn't infer from the skill name alone. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete guidance—no code, no commands, no specific steps, no examples of actual impact analysis. The 'Capabilities' section lists vague promises ('provides step-by-step guidance') without delivering any actual guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined whatsoever. There are no steps, no sequence, no validation checkpoints. The skill claims to provide 'step-by-step guidance' but contains none. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a flat, repetitive document with no meaningful structure. There are no references to detailed files, no layered content organization, and the sections are superficial headers over vacuous content. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 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 | |
- Commit
c8a915c
- 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.