quality-speed
Decides when quality matters vs move fast, based on Dylan Field (Figma) craft philosophy and Brian Chesky (Airbnb) details obsession. Use when balancing shipping speed with excellence, deciding if refactoring is needed, or determining which details create moats vs which to skip.
85
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-crafted description that clearly communicates its purpose and when to use it. The explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger scenarios is strong. The main weakness is that the capabilities could be more concrete - it describes decision-making but doesn't specify what outputs or artifacts it produces.
Suggestions
Add more concrete action verbs describing outputs, e.g., 'Provides frameworks for evaluating...' or 'Generates recommendations on...' to clarify what Claude actually produces when using this skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (quality vs speed decisions) and references specific philosophies (Dylan Field, Brian Chesky), but the actual actions are somewhat abstract - 'decides', 'balancing', 'determining' rather than concrete outputs like 'generates prioritization frameworks' or 'produces quality assessment checklists'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Decides when quality matters vs move fast') and when ('Use when balancing shipping speed with excellence, deciding if refactoring is needed, or determining which details create moats vs which to skip') with explicit trigger scenarios. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Good coverage of natural terms users would say: 'shipping speed', 'excellence', 'refactoring', 'details', 'moats'. These are terms developers and product people naturally use when facing quality/speed tradeoffs. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche around quality/speed tradeoff decisions with specific philosophical frameworks (Figma/Airbnb). The combination of 'craft philosophy', 'details obsession', 'moats', and 'refactoring' creates a distinct trigger profile unlikely to conflict with general coding or product skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is well-structured and concise, effectively using visual formats like matrices and checklists to convey decision criteria. However, it would benefit from a concrete worked example showing the template filled out for a real scenario, and a clearer step-by-step decision workflow rather than just criteria lists.
Suggestions
Add a completed example of the Quality Assessment template showing a real feature decision (e.g., 'Login page redesign' with all fields filled and final decision justified)
Convert the implicit decision process into an explicit numbered workflow: 1) Identify feature type, 2) Check signals, 3) Apply matrix, 4) Document decision
Include a brief 'edge case' section for ambiguous situations where signals conflict (e.g., user-facing experiment)
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is lean and efficient, using structured formats (matrix, checklists, templates) rather than verbose explanations. Every section serves a clear purpose without explaining concepts Claude already understands. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides a useful decision matrix and template structure, but the guidance remains somewhat abstract. The template is a fill-in-the-blank format rather than showing concrete completed examples with specific decisions made. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The decision process is implied through the template and checklist, but there's no explicit sequence of steps to follow. Missing clear workflow like 'First assess X, then evaluate Y, finally decide Z' with validation checkpoints. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill under 50 lines with a single conceptual focus, the content is well-organized with clear sections (frameworks, templates, quick reference, quotes). No external references needed for this scope. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- menkesu/awesome-pm-skills
- Commit
53530ef
- 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.