CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

talk-wilson-cq-stack-overflow-for-agents

Use when the user asks about Peter Wilson and Davide Eynard's AI Native DevCon talk on cq, a Stack Overflow-like knowledge commons for agents, local/team/public knowledge sharing, and lessons from Mozilla.ai.

61

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./Plugins/aidevcon/skills/talk-wilson-cq-stack-overflow-for-agents/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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 concise, actionable, well-sequenced reference skill body whose main weakness is progressive disclosure: it directs the agent to bundle files that are not present in the bundle.

Suggestions

Ship outline.md, quote.md, and transcript.md in ./references/ so the referenced disclosure chain actually resolves, or document where these files are materialized at runtime.

Tighten or remove the "Core Concepts" bullet list, which restates facets already in the description, to recover a few tokens.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence—it gives grounding and safety rules without padding or explaining concepts Claude already knows; the only minor trim is the "Core Concepts" list, which lightly overlaps the description.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and specific ("Read outline.md first", "Use quote.md for short supporting excerpts, then verify against transcript.md", "cite the transcript line IDs when available"), providing mostly executable procedural direction with only minor gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear grounding sequence (outline → quote → verify against transcript) is given, with a verification checkpoint in rule 4 ("If the transcript does not support a claim, say that the talk does not address it"); no destructive or batch operations apply, so the cap is not triggered.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References are clearly signaled and one-level-deep, but the referenced bundle files (outline.md, quote.md, transcript.md) are absent from the ./references/ bundle, so the disclosure chain an agent would follow is broken.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

73%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 well-targeted description with explicit trigger guidance and strong distinctiveness, weakened only by leaving the skill's actual function (grounded Q&A) implicit and slightly thin action framing.

Suggestions

State the skill's function explicitly, e.g. "Answer questions about... by grounding answers in the bundled transcript, outline, and quotes" so the 'what it does' is not merely implied.

Add a couple more natural trigger phrasings users might say (e.g. "cq knowledge commons", "agent knowledge sharing") to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain and several concrete facets of the talk (cq, "Stack Overflow-like knowledge commons for agents, local/team/public knowledge sharing, and lessons from Mozilla.ai"), but the skill's actual action—answering questions grounded in a transcript—is implied rather than stated, matching the anchor that names a domain with concrete facets but is not comprehensive on actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both "what" (the talk's subject matter) and "when" ("Use when the user asks about...") are present with concrete trigger phrases, but the "what the skill does" is conveyed by describing the talk rather than stating the skill's function explicitly.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural terms a user would say—"Peter Wilson and Davide Eynard", "AI Native DevCon talk", "cq", "knowledge commons for agents"—giving good keyword coverage, though a few natural synonyms or phrasings are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The trigger is pinned to named speakers, a named conference, and a named tool, giving it a clear niche with minimal risk of firing for an unrelated skill.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

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.