CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

he-work

Implement approved Harness Engineering work. Use when a plan, todo list, or tiny spec needs traceable delivery and validation.

46

Quality

48%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

The risk profile of this skill

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

Quality

Content

57%Scale 1-3

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

This skill functions as a reasonable overview/entry point for a complex workflow, with good progressive disclosure to detailed reference files. Its main weaknesses are redundancy across sections (Constraints/Gotchas/Core Contract overlap) and insufficient actionability — the procedure steps are too abstract and lack concrete examples of inputs, outputs, or decision points. The single concrete command (lint script) is a bright spot but insufficient for the complexity of the workflow described.

Suggestions

Consolidate overlapping content across Core Contract, Constraints, Gotchas, and Validation into fewer distinct sections to eliminate redundancy (e.g., 'Do not claim completion without validation evidence' appears twice).

Add a concrete worked example showing what a 'verified slice' looks like end-to-end: the governing artifact snippet, the implementation step, the validation command output, and the handoff evidence format.

Make the Procedure section more actionable by specifying concrete actions for each step (e.g., what 'resolve Linear' means in terms of actual commands or checks to perform).

Define key terms like 'execution lane,' 'contract drift,' and 'plan-led vs todo-led vs small-spec-direct' inline with brief descriptions, or ensure the execution-modes reference is consulted before step 1.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is moderately efficient but has notable redundancy — 'Do not claim completion without validation evidence' appears in both Constraints and Gotchas, and several concepts are restated across Core Contract, Procedure, and Validation sections. Some sections like Anti-patterns and Examples add minimal value. However, it avoids explaining basic concepts Claude already knows.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides one concrete executable command (the traceability lint script), but most guidance is procedural/conceptual rather than copy-paste ready. Terms like 'verified slice,' 'contract drift,' and 'execution lane' are used without concrete definitions or examples of what these look like in practice. The Examples section gives only trigger phrases, not input/output examples.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The Procedure section provides a 4-step sequence but each step is too abstract to be truly clear (e.g., 'Implement one verified slice at a time'). The Validation section includes a concrete lint command and 'stop at the first failed gate' is a good checkpoint, but the feedback loop for error recovery is implicit rather than explicit. The relationship between Procedure, Validation, and Core Contract sections creates ambiguity about the actual execution flow.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is well-structured as an overview with clear, well-signaled one-level-deep references to detailed materials (full guide, handoff-and-shipping, execution-modes, approval-flow, etc.). The References section provides specific file paths for deeper content, and the main body stays at an appropriate summary level.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

40%Scale 1-3

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 too vague about what concrete actions the skill performs, relying on abstract phrases like 'implement approved work' and 'traceable delivery and validation.' While it includes a 'Use when...' clause with some trigger terms, the overall lack of specificity about capabilities makes it difficult to distinguish from other implementation or task management skills.

Suggestions

Replace 'Implement approved Harness Engineering work' with specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Creates branches, writes code changes, runs tests, and submits PRs for Harness Engineering tasks').

Expand trigger terms with natural user phrases and file types or tools involved (e.g., 'Use when executing tasks from a plan, checklist, or spec that requires code changes, test validation, and commit tracking').

Clarify what 'traceable delivery and validation' means in practice — list the specific validation steps or deliverables the skill produces.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description uses vague language like 'implement approved work' and 'traceable delivery and validation' without listing any concrete actions. It does not specify what kind of work is being implemented or what specific operations are performed.

1 / 3

Completeness

It has a 'Use when...' clause addressing the 'when' question with triggers like 'plan, todo list, or tiny spec', but the 'what' is extremely vague — 'implement approved work' and 'traceable delivery and validation' don't clearly explain what the skill actually does.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes some relevant terms like 'plan', 'todo list', 'tiny spec' that users might naturally say, but 'Harness Engineering' is domain-specific jargon and 'traceable delivery and validation' are not natural user phrases. Missing common variations or more concrete trigger terms.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The mention of 'Harness Engineering' provides some domain specificity, but 'implement approved work' and 'plan/todo list' are generic enough to overlap with many task management or implementation skills.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

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.