CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

he-ideate

Generate and compare grounded product or engineering directions with tradeoffs. Use when users want possibilities, critique, or direction-setting before a spec.

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./Plugins/harness-engineering/fixtures/budget-archive/2026-04-21/deferred-store/skills/team_automation/he-ideate/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A lean, well-organized instruction-only skill with a clear sequenced procedure and explicit validation gates. Its weaknesses are incomplete execution mechanics and a progressive-disclosure structure that promises reference material the bundle does not actually contain.

Suggestions

Either create the referenced bundle files (the 'archived references' and the assets/icon-small.png and assets/icon-large.png icons) or remove the dead links and the 'archived references' claim so the entrypoint matches the actual bundle.

Add a concrete output example (a short sample ideation result showing candidates, rejection reasons, ranked survivors, and the next-action line) so the `schema_version: 1` output format is unambiguous.

Specify where recent matching ideation docs are looked up and what a 'shallow codebase scan' covers (e.g., which directories or commands), so step 2 and step 3 are executable without guesswork.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient with short, purposeful sections and no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows. Minor trimmable redundancy: the generate-before-critique rule is restated in Philosophy ("Generate many candidates before critique"), Procedure steps 4-5, Validation, and Anti-patterns. This fits anchor 4 (minor instances that could be trimmed) rather than 5, where every token would earn its place.

4 / 5

Actionability

The procedure gives concrete sequencing and routing ("Route the strongest survivor to `he-brainstorm`"), but key execution details are missing: where recent ideation docs are found, what a "shallow codebase scan" entails, and what the output looks like beyond `schema_version: 1` — there is no output example. This matches anchor 3 (some concrete guidance but incomplete, missing key details) rather than 4.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 6-step numbered sequence is paired with an explicit Validation section and a fail-fast gate ("stop at first failed gate and do not proceed"), which matches anchor 4. It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no error-recovery feedback loop or checklist detail beyond the bare gate list.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned for a short skill, but it claims "keeps full operational context in archived references" and links assets/icon-small.png and icon-large.png — yet no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist in the bundle, so every external pointer is dead. Structure is present but navigation is broken, fitting anchor 3 rather than 4.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description with an explicit what-and-when structure and natural trigger phrases. Its main gaps are limited action coverage in the description itself and some overlap-prone trigger terms like "critique".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names its domain ("product or engineering directions") and two concrete actions ("Generate and compare... with tradeoffs"), but coverage is not comprehensive — ranking, feasibility analysis, and repo grounding are only covered in the body, not the description. It sits above anchor 2 (which would name the domain with minimal actions) but below anchor 4 (which requires several specific actions).

3 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("Generate and compare grounded product or engineering directions with tradeoffs") and when ("Use when users want possibilities, critique, or direction-setting before a spec") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 example pattern exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrases are present: "possibilities", "critique", "direction-setting", "before a spec", plus "tradeoffs" in the capability clause. Common synonyms users would say — "explore options", "brainstorm", "ideas", "compare approaches" — are missing, so it fits anchor 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The pre-spec positioning carves a clear niche distinct from planning or implementation skills. Minor overlap risk remains: "critique" could trigger review/critique skills and "possibilities" could trigger general brainstorming skills, which fits anchor 4 rather than the minimal-conflict anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

jscraik/Agent-Skills

Path

Plugins/harness-engineering/fixtures/budget-archive/2026-04-21/deferred-store/skills/team_automation/he-ideate/SKILL.md

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.