CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

senior-prompt-engineer

World-class prompt engineering skill for LLM optimization, prompt patterns, structured outputs, and AI product development. Expertise in Claude, GPT-4, prompt design patterns, few-shot learning, chain-of-thought, and AI evaluation. Includes RAG optimization, agent design, and LLM system architecture. Use when building AI products, optimizing LLM performance, designing agentic systems, or implementing advanced prompting techniques.

48

Quality

60%

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 ./.claude/skills/senior-prompt-engineer/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

33%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.

The body is a bloated capability resume rather than a usable skill: its one redeeming features are concrete script commands and well-signaled, genuinely existing one-level-deep references. It contains no prompt-engineering instruction, no workflow, and pages of generic SRE/leadership filler that wastes context.

Suggestions

Cut the sections unrelated to prompt engineering (Team Leadership, Senior-Level Responsibilities, Security & Compliance, Performance Targets, Tech Stack) — they are generic knowledge Claude already has.

Replace the descriptive 'Production Patterns' and 'Best Practices' bullet lists with an actual sequenced workflow: e.g. define the task -> draft the prompt -> run scripts/prompt_optimizer.py -> evaluate with scripts/rag_evaluator.py -> iterate, with a validation step before finalizing.

Show one or two concrete prompt-engineering patterns inline (a before/after prompt example) so the skill instructs rather than describes, and move the remaining generic material into the existing reference files.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Most of the body is generic senior-engineer boilerplate unrelated to prompt engineering: 'Team leadership and mentoring', 'Mentor junior engineers', 'Canary deployments', 'P50: < 50ms', 'kubectl apply -f k8s/', and 'Senior-Level Responsibilities' sections teach Claude nothing it doesn't already know. It is noticeably padded throughout, though it is bullet-list filler rather than prose re-explanations, keeping it just above the lowest anchor.

2 / 5

Actionability

Concrete executable commands exist ('python scripts/prompt_optimizer.py --input data/ --output results/'), and the referenced scripts are real files, but no actual prompt-engineering guidance follows: sections like 'Advanced production patterns and architectures' and 'Ensure high availability' only describe, never instruct. Key details — what the tools do, how to apply a pattern, any worked example — are missing, matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

No workflow exists anywhere in the body: the Quick Start presents three tools as 'Main Capabilities' with no ordering or usage steps, there is no sequence for accomplishing any prompt-engineering task, and no validation checkpoints appear at all. This matches the lowest anchor ('steps missing; no sequence; no validation').

1 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

All three referenced files (references/prompt_engineering_patterns.md, references/llm_evaluation_frameworks.md, references/agentic_system_design.md) exist, are clearly signaled, and are one level deep with no nested references. Minor gaps: the pointer list is duplicated in 'Reference Documentation' and 'Resources', and generic content (Production Patterns, Best Practices, Senior-Level Responsibilities) is inlined in SKILL.md where it belongs in the reference files.

4 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

The description answers both what and when with a clear trigger clause and mostly natural keywords, but leans on buzzword-heavy expertise claims ('World-class', 'AI product development') instead of concrete actions. It would be stronger if it stated specific actions like 'designs, tests, and optimizes prompts, builds RAG pipelines, and evaluates LLM outputs'.

Suggestions

Replace expertise-noun phrases ('Expertise in Claude, GPT-4, prompt design patterns') with concrete action verbs ('Designs and optimizes prompts, builds few-shot examples, structures LLM outputs, evaluates RAG pipelines').

Trim buzzword padding like 'World-class' and 'AI product development' that adds no trigger value.

Add common natural trigger phrases users would actually say, e.g. 'improve prompts', 'prompt writing', or 'chatbot responses'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Phrases like 'World-class prompt engineering skill for LLM optimization, prompt patterns, structured outputs' and 'Includes RAG optimization, agent design, and LLM system architecture' name the domain and capability topics, but no concrete action verbs describe what the skill actually does. It sits at the 'names domain and some concrete elements' anchor, below the 'several specific actions' anchor because everything is stated as areas of expertise rather than actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: a what ('prompt engineering skill for LLM optimization, prompt patterns, structured outputs...') and an explicit 'Use when building AI products, optimizing LLM performance, designing agentic systems, or implementing advanced prompting techniques'. Not a 5 because the what is padded with 'World-class' and 'AI product development' buzz rather than crisp concrete capabilities.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms like 'prompt', 'optimizing LLM performance', 'designing agentic systems', 'prompting techniques', 'few-shot learning', 'chain-of-thought', 'RAG', and 'building AI products' give good keyword coverage. Not a 5 because common variations users would say ('improve prompts', 'prompt writing', 'chatbot') are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Prompt engineering with named technologies (Claude, GPT-4, RAG, agents) is a distinct niche with clear triggers. Only minor overlap risk with closely related LLM-API or RAG skills, matching the 'mostly distinct' anchor.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 3 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

maslennikov-ig/claude-code-orchestrator-kit

Path

.claude/skills/senior-prompt-engineer/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.