CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

speckit-constitution

Create or update the project constitution from interactive or provided principle inputs, ensuring all dependent templates stay in sync.

63

1.61x
Quality

52%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

76%

1.61x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/speckit-constitution/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

47%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill provides a thorough and well-sequenced workflow for constitution management with good validation checkpoints, but suffers from significant verbosity—particularly the duplicated hook-checking blocks and over-explanation of concepts Claude already understands. The lack of concrete examples (e.g., a sample filled placeholder, a sample Sync Impact Report) reduces actionability despite the otherwise specific file path references and clear process steps.

Suggestions

Extract the duplicated pre/post hook-checking logic into a shared reference file (e.g., HOOKS.md) and reference it from both sections to cut ~30 lines of duplication.

Add a concrete before/after example showing a placeholder like [PROJECT_NAME] being replaced with an actual value, and a sample Sync Impact Report snippet.

Remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows—semantic versioning rules, how to parse YAML, what ISO date format is—and replace with terse directives (e.g., 'Bump version per semver').

Restructure the outline into a concise numbered checklist with detailed guidance for complex steps (like consistency propagation) moved to a separate reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is extremely verbose with significant duplication. The pre-execution and post-execution hook sections are nearly identical blocks of text (~30 lines each) that could be abstracted into a shared reference. The outline section contains extensive procedural detail that could be significantly tightened. Many instructions explain things Claude already knows (e.g., how to parse YAML, what semantic versioning is, how to replace placeholders).

1 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides a clear multi-step process with specific file paths and concrete actions (read files, replace placeholders, write output). However, it lacks executable code examples—no actual command snippets for file operations, no example of what a filled-in constitution looks like, and the placeholder replacement process is described abstractly rather than demonstrated with a concrete before/after example.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit validation at step 6 (no unexplained bracket tokens, version matching, date format, principle language quality). Step 5 produces a Sync Impact Report as a verification artifact. The consistency propagation checklist in step 4 serves as a validation checkpoint for dependent files. Error handling is addressed (missing files, unknown dates → TODO markers).

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external documentation. The duplicated hook-checking logic (pre and post execution) should be extracted to a shared reference file. The skill references many file paths (.specify/templates/*.md, .specify/extensions.yml) but doesn't link to any supporting documentation about their structure or format. For a skill this long (~120 lines of dense content), better structural organization with external references would improve navigability.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 identifies a clear niche around project constitution management and template syncing, which gives it good distinctiveness. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause and could benefit from more natural trigger terms that users would actually say. The specificity of actions is moderate—it mentions create/update and sync but doesn't elaborate on the concrete operations involved.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to define, update, or review project principles, guidelines, or constitution files.'

Include natural trigger term variations such as 'project guidelines', 'coding principles', 'project rules', 'project standards' to improve discoverability.

List more specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Collects principles interactively, validates against existing rules, generates or updates constitution markdown, and propagates changes to dependent template files.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('project constitution') and some actions ('create or update', 'sync dependent templates'), but doesn't list specific concrete sub-actions like what principles look like, what templates are involved, or what 'interactive inputs' entail.

2 / 3

Completeness

Answers 'what' reasonably well (create/update constitution, sync templates), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps this at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant terms like 'project constitution', 'principle inputs', and 'templates', but misses common natural variations a user might say such as 'project guidelines', 'project rules', 'coding standards', or 'project config'. 'Constitution' is somewhat niche terminology.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The concept of a 'project constitution' with 'principle inputs' and 'dependent templates' is a fairly distinct niche that is unlikely to conflict with other common skills like general config management or documentation skills.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation9 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

9

/

11

Passed

Repository
mixpanel/mixpanel-headless
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.