CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

customer-support-agent

Authoring playbook for building agents that triage and reply to customer messages — support tickets, email inquiries, chat questions, refund requests, or product issues. Use this when the user wants an agent that handles inbound customer questions, drafts replies, escalates hard cases, summarizes tickets, or follows a support playbook.

72

Quality

87%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 highly actionable authoring playbook with a complete system prompt template and worked example. Its main gaps are mild redundancy of the action-boundary rules across four sections and the absence of an explicit final validation step for the produced agent prompt.

Suggestions

Consolidate the action-boundary rules: state them once in the 'Action boundary' section and have the template, 'Required behavioral rules', and 'Anti-patterns' sections cross-reference it instead of restating it.

Add an explicit final verification step (e.g., 'Before finishing, check the produced prompt against the Anti-patterns list and the five completion criteria') to strengthen the workflow's feedback loop.

Consider moving the worked example or the capabilities/escalation detail into a reference file to keep SKILL.md as a lean overview with one-level-deep references.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient — templates, bullet lists, and a worked example with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. It sits at 4 rather than 5 because the action-boundary rules are restated across four sections ("Action boundary", the template's "# Action boundary", "Required behavioral rules", and "Anti-patterns"), which could be tightened to one authoritative statement plus cross-references. Not 3 because the redundancy is deliberate enforcement of the skill's most important rule, not padding.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully concrete for an instruction-only skill: a copy-ready system prompt template, name/description patterns with examples, an eight-category classification taxonomy, five numbered completion criteria, and a full worked example. Every section tells the builder exactly what to produce.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The composition sequence is clear (identity → action boundary → system prompt template → required rules → capabilities → anti-patterns → worked example) and the anti-patterns section functions as a review checklist. Not 5 because there is no explicit validation step instructing the builder to verify the produced prompt against the rules and anti-patterns before finishing; not 3 because the sequence and checkpoints are largely explicit.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single well-sectioned SKILL.md with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist) and no content that clearly belongs in a separate file; headers make navigation easy. Not 5 because at ~130 lines it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill case, and the worked example or capability guidance could be split into reference files.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 strong: it states what the skill does, enumerates natural trigger phrases, and carves out a distinct niche in customer-support agent authoring. Its only weakness is that a few common synonyms and tool names (helpdesk, Zendesk, customer service) live in the body rather than the description itself.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "triage and reply to customer messages", "drafts replies, escalates hard cases, summarizes tickets" — covering the domain comprehensively, matching the top anchor. Not 4 because coverage of the support-agent task surface is complete rather than having minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Authoring playbook for building agents that triage and reply to customer messages") and when ("Use this when the user wants an agent that handles inbound customer questions...") with concrete trigger phrases. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is explicit and enumerated rather than merely present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would say are present ("support tickets", "email inquiries", "chat questions", "refund requests", "customer questions"), but a few common variations are missing — "helpdesk", "customer service", and tool names like "Zendesk"/"Intercom" appear only in the body, not the description. Not 5 because the synonym coverage is good rather than comprehensive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (customer support agent authoring) with distinct triggers (tickets, refunds, escalations, SLA-style vocabulary); minimal conflict risk with other skills. Not 4 because the enumerated trigger phrases are specific to this domain rather than broadly overlapping.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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
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.