Name: teamdeck
Rating: 56.00000000000001 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

Blog Docs Log in Get started

teamdeck

Teamdeck integration. Manage Organizations. Use when the user wants to interact with Teamdeck data.

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/teamdeck/SKILL.md

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 highly actionable with executable CLI commands and a well-handled connection state machine, but it is held back by a verbose inlined entity list and a couple of dangling step references. Moving the entity catalog into a reference file and tightening the step numbering would improve both conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Move the ~85-item entity overview into a separate reference file (e.g., references/entities.md) and summarize the main categories inline, collapsing the redundant "Custom Field"/"Default Custom Field" duplication.

Fix the dangling "Step 2" reference and the unlabeled "1b"/"1a" numbering so the connection workflow reads as a coherent numbered sequence.

Populate the "Popular actions" heading with a few concrete example action invocations instead of only redirecting to discovery.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The prose and code blocks are mostly efficient, but the ~85-item bulleted entity list — heavily padded with repeated "Custom Field"/"Default Custom Field" variants — is a large section of tokens that could be tightened or externalized.	3 / 5
Actionability	Commands are copy-paste ready throughout (install, login, connection ensure/get, action list/run with JSON input, request proxy with a full flag table), covering the common integration cases concretely.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The connection flow has a clear state machine with polling and explicit checkpoints (READY, BUILDING, CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED, error states), but an undefined "Step 2" reference and an unlabeled step 1a leave minor sequencing gaps.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers provide some structure, but with no bundle files everything is inlined, including the long entity enumeration that would be better placed in a separate reference file.	3 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

57%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 correctly pairs a 'what' and a 'when' trigger clause and leverages a distinct brand name, but it undersells the skill's actual breadth with a single generic action. Expanding the action list and adding natural synonyms would raise specificity and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Replace the single generic action "Manage Organizations" with several concrete capabilities the skill actually exposes (e.g., manage time entries, bookings, resources, and reports).

Add natural trigger synonyms users might say, such as "scheduling", "time tracking", "bookings", or "resource allocation", to improve trigger term coverage.

Make the 'when' clause more specific by naming the data domains (e.g., "Use when the user wants to query or update Teamdeck time entries, bookings, or resources").

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("Teamdeck integration") but the only action stated is the generic "Manage Organizations", which is minimal and not comprehensive — comparable to the anchor 'Processes PDF files'.	2 / 5
Completeness	Both a 'what' ("Teamdeck integration. Manage Organizations.") and an explicit 'when' ("Use when the user wants to interact with Teamdeck data") are present, though the 'what' is thin and the 'when' could be more specific.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The natural trigger phrase "interact with Teamdeck data" and the "Teamdeck" brand keyword are present, but common variations or synonyms for the use cases are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Teamdeck" is a specific named application, giving it a clear niche and minimal conflict risk, though the trigger phrasing is narrow enough to leave minor overlap with generic integration skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: membranedev/application-skills
Path: skills/teamdeck/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 4 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.