CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

configure-factory-rules

Configure board-owned lifecycle, policy, phase-semantics, and tool-result rules, plus integration event rules

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 ./mastracode/factory/factory-skills/configure-factory-rules/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.

The body is a dense, efficient instruction set packed with project-specific constraints, exact file locations, and explicit verification steps — it trusts the reader and wastes little on general knowledge. Its main weakness is organization: everything lives in one long file, and the executable detail (custom-board execution, handler replacement) could be split into well-signaled reference files.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Nearly every sentence carries non-obvious project constraints (e.g. 'new MastraFactory({ rules }) throws', 'logs one warning per board', exact handler file paths) with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; a few long compound sentences could be trimmed, matching 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation'.

4 / 5

Actionability

Gives concrete file paths (src/boards/work.ts, src/integrations/github/default-rules.ts), exact option names (includeDefaultBoards, configVersion, tools.submit_plan.onResult), and TypeScript snippets, but the snippets are fragments and it defers to an external 'Factory README' example not included in the bundle, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear find → change → verify arc with explicit validation checkpoints ('Add or update focused tests', 'Run the narrow Factory rule tests and package typecheck', 'Run the Web build') and a 5-step pre-change checklist; falls short of the top anchor because error-recovery feedback loops beyond 'do not weaken tests' are not spelled out.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good section headers but the ~114-line document keeps all detail inline with no bundle files; deep-dive material ('Execute a custom board', 'Change a built-in handler') is reference-file content inlined in SKILL.md, and one pointer targets an external README, matching 'some structure but could be better organized'.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 is specific and niche-scoped, clearly naming the rule categories the skill configures, but it omits any explicit 'when to use this' trigger guidance and misses the natural terms (Factory, GitHub, Linear) a user would say. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with those platform names would lift both completeness and trigger term quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when changing Factory board rules, phase semantics, or GitHub/Linear integration event handlers in the deployment configuration.'

Include the natural platform keywords users would actually say — Factory, MastraFactory, GitHub, Linear, board rules — rather than only abstract rule-category jargon.

State the concrete actions beyond 'configure', such as replacing built-in handlers, removing deprecated rules.work/rules.review config, or setting configVersion.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates five concrete rule categories ('lifecycle, policy, phase-semantics, and tool-result rules, plus integration event rules') but relies on a single action verb ('Configure') rather than the multiple distinct actions of the top anchor, so it sits noticeably above the midpoint with minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (configure these board-owned and integration rule types), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Keywords like 'lifecycle', 'policy', 'phase-semantics', and 'integration event rules' are relevant but jargon-heavy, and the natural terms a user would most likely say ('Factory', 'GitHub', 'Linear', 'board rules') are absent, matching 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'board-owned lifecycle... phase-semantics... integration event rules' carves out a clear niche unlikely to trigger unrelated skills, but the top anchor requires distinct explicit trigger phrases, which this description lacks, leaving minor overlap risk with closely related configuration skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

mastra-ai/mastra

Path

mastracode/factory/factory-skills/configure-factory-rules/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.