CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

he-improve

Improve existing Harness Engineering implementations or workflows with evidence-backed changes. Use when users ask for targeted enhancement of shipped or drafted work.

Quality

61%

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-improve/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

45%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 well-organized instruction-only body with a genuine validation culture (fail-fast gates, verified durable writes), but it operates at framework altitude: nearly every step depends on artifacts (optimization spec, measurement harness, session-evidence contract) that are never concretized, and every referenced bundle file is missing. Adding a minimal spec/gate example and fixing the reference paths would lift the two weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Show a minimal concrete example of the optimization spec and a measurement gate (e.g., a short YAML snippet with metric type, target, gate, and stopping limit) so procedure step 1 is executable rather than aspirational.

Fix progressive disclosure: bundle 'session-evidence-contract.md' under a real references/ path with a one-level-deep relative link, and either include or remove the ./assets/icon-*.png links that currently point to nonexistent files.

Name the measurement harness and where experiment state is written (file paths) so 'run bounded iterations with isolated experiment state' has an operational answer.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient imperative bullets that assume Claude's competence, but the meta 'Progressive Disclosure Entry' section and durability/validation points repeated across Philosophy, Procedure, Validation, and Constraints could be tightened. More than the minor over-explanation of anchor 4, short of the padding of anchor 2.

3 / 5

Actionability

High-level hints with occasional specifics ('schema_version: 1', 'fresh versus resume state', '~/.agents/session-collector') but no executable specifics: the optimization spec has no format or location, the 'measurement harness' is never identified, and no example of a gate, spec, or experiment state file is given. This matches anchor 2 — missing the specific steps to execute — rather than anchor 3's 'concrete guidance but incomplete'.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 8-step sequence with explicit checkpoints (validate the spec before experimentation, verify disk writes before reporting, 'Fail fast: stop at first failed gate') and a keep/revise/discard feedback loop. Falls short of anchor 5 because error recovery beyond 'stop' is thin and steps like 'classify recurring signals' and 'route proven results' lack operational detail.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body's core claim — 'keeps full operational context in archived references' — rests on links to files that do not exist in the bundle: '../../../../../../references/session-evidence-contract.md' (a buried six-levels-up path) and './assets/icon-small.png' / 'icon-large.png'. The body itself is well-sectioned, but the references are broken and buried, matching anchor 2 rather than anchor 3's merely 'not clearly signaled' references.

2 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 solid two-sentence description with correct third-person voice and both what and when clauses. Its weaknesses are generic action framing ('improve' rather than concrete operations like running bounded experiments or establishing baselines) and thin natural trigger coverage.

Suggestions

Replace the generic 'Improve... with evidence-backed changes' with concrete actions, e.g., 'Run bounded experiments against measured baselines, compare changes under explicit gates, and keep or revert based on observed metrics.'

Broaden trigger terms to the phrases users naturally say: 'optimize', 'tune', 'speed up', 'before and after metrics', 'make this workflow better without breaking it'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Harness Engineering implementations or workflows') and frames one to two actions ('Improve... with evidence-backed changes'), but 'improve' is a single generic action. Not the several specific actions of anchor 4, yet more articulated than the bare 'Processes PDF files' of anchor 2.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both what ('Improve existing Harness Engineering implementations or workflows with evidence-backed changes') and when ('Use when users ask for targeted enhancement of shipped or drafted work') are explicitly present. Falls short of anchor 5 because the when is abstract rather than concrete trigger phrasing.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'Improve', 'targeted enhancement', and 'shipped or drafted work' are relevant keywords, but common natural variations users would actually say ('optimize', 'tune', 'make this faster', 'before and after metrics') are absent — missing more than the few terms allowed at anchor 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Harness Engineering' establishes a clear niche, but the trigger 'targeted enhancement of shipped or drafted work' is generic enough to leave minor overlap risk with general improve/refactor skills, matching anchor 4 rather than the minimal conflict of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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, 1 suspicious

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-improve/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.