CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

he-deepen-spec

Deepen an existing system or UI spec so boundaries, lifecycle rules, failure handling, and validation are strong enough for planning. Use when the user wants Harness Engineering spec hardening or a requirements review pass before planning.

61

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./Plugins/harness-engineering/fixtures/budget-archive/2026-04-21/deferred-store/skills/team_automation/he-deepen-spec/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%

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

This is a well-structured process skill for specification hardening with strong workflow clarity and excellent progressive disclosure. Its main weakness is limited actionability—it describes what to do conceptually but lacks concrete output templates, before/after examples, or structured schemas that would make the guidance more executable. Conciseness could be improved by trimming redundant guidance across sections.

Suggestions

Add a concrete before/after example showing a weak spec passage transformed into a deepened one with explicit boundaries and acceptance criteria.

Provide a structured output template or JSON schema for the readiness recommendation, especially since 'schema_version: 1' is mentioned but never defined.

Consolidate the anti-patterns and validation sections to reduce redundancy—several anti-patterns are just negations of validation gates.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is reasonably structured but includes some redundancy (e.g., the anti-patterns section partially restates validation gates, and the philosophy section restates what the procedure already implies). The 'Progressive Disclosure Entry' preamble and some meta-commentary about the skill itself add tokens without clear value. However, it avoids explaining basic concepts Claude already knows.

2 / 3

Actionability

The procedure provides a clear sequence of steps and the domain-consistency and interface-design passes give concrete criteria, but there are no executable code examples, no template outputs, and no concrete before/after spec examples. The guidance is specific enough to follow but lacks copy-paste-ready artifacts or structured output templates despite mentioning 'schema_version: 1'.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 7-step procedure is clearly sequenced with explicit gates (e.g., 'block planning when a required interface shape is still unresolved', 'fail fast: stop at first failed gate'). The validation section provides explicit checkpoints, and the interface-design pass includes a clear compare-then-select feedback loop. The workflow handles error recovery by stopping at the first failed gate.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill explicitly positions itself as a concise entrypoint with well-signaled one-level-deep references to canonical contracts, eval cases, task profiles, subagent routing, and domain model routing. References are clearly labeled with 'Read when' conditions. The Full Context section provides organized navigation to supporting files.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

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 well-structured with a clear 'Use when' clause and a distinct niche that separates it from other skills. Its main weakness is that the specific actions it performs are described at a category level (boundaries, lifecycle rules, failure handling, validation) rather than as concrete operations, and the trigger terms could be broader to capture more natural user language.

Suggestions

Add more concrete actions, e.g., 'identifies missing edge cases, defines state transitions, adds error recovery paths, and specifies input validation rules'

Expand trigger terms to include natural user phrases like 'tighten spec,' 'edge cases,' 'spec gaps,' 'review requirements,' or 'harden requirements'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a domain (system/UI spec hardening) and mentions specific areas like 'boundaries, lifecycle rules, failure handling, and validation,' but these are more like categories than concrete actions. It doesn't list specific operations like 'add error codes,' 'define state transitions,' or 'enumerate edge cases.'

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (deepen an existing spec so boundaries, lifecycle rules, failure handling, and validation are strong enough for planning) and 'when' (when the user wants spec hardening or a requirements review pass before planning), with an explicit 'Use when' clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant terms like 'spec hardening,' 'requirements review,' 'failure handling,' and 'validation,' but misses natural user phrases like 'edge cases,' 'spec review,' 'tighten requirements,' 'error handling,' or 'spec gaps.' The term 'Harness Engineering' is very specific/branded and may help or hurt depending on context.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche — spec hardening/deepening before planning — with distinct triggers like 'spec hardening' and 'requirements review pass before planning.' The branded term 'Harness Engineering' further reduces conflict risk. This is unlikely to be confused with general coding, planning, or documentation skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
jscraik/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.