CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

fast-review

One independent reviewer checks a change against its acceptance criteria and answers PASS or FAIL before it is accepted. Use before accepting delegated work, before delivering a change, or when someone asks for a review.

74

Quality

93%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

100%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.

An exemplary lean skill body: dense decision rules, a ready-to-dispatch reviewer prompt, explicit verdict and retry semantics, and a complete escalation table. It fully respects Claude's competence while adding exactly the procedural detail Claude could not infer.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every sentence is a rule or decision input — skip conditions, reviewer inputs, verdict criteria, escalation table — with zero explanation of concepts Claude already knows. The 44-line body earns every token; even rationale sentences like 'A panel costs three reviews' carry a decision rule.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides a fully copy-paste-ready reviewer prompt template with explicit placeholders (<title>, <diff>, <its feedback>), the exact inputs to supply and withhold, a concrete verdict format with severity levels, and specific retry limits ('retry N of 2'). An executable example covers the common case end to end.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequenced workflow with explicit validation checkpoints: run tests/lint/build first, gate acceptance on the PASS/FAIL verdict, retry with feedback passed forward ('Previous FAIL, on a retry: <its feedback>'), and a defined escalation path (panel of three, then stop and tell the user). The feedback loop for the FAIL-retry cycle is fully specified.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no need for external references: content is split into well-organized, clearly headed sections (When to skip it, Review, After a FAIL) and stays one level deep. Meets the simple-skill exception for a top structure score.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong description: third-person voice, concrete mechanism and output (independent reviewer, acceptance criteria, PASS/FAIL), and an explicit multi-scenario 'Use when' clause. The only weaknesses are a few missing natural trigger synonyms and slight overlap risk with generic code-review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

States several concrete actions — 'checks a change against its acceptance criteria', 'answers PASS or FAIL', gating 'before it is accepted' — with a precisely characterized mechanism (one independent reviewer). Minor gaps only (retry/panel behavior is not surfaced), placing it above the bare two-action anchor 3 but below fully comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('one independent reviewer checks a change against its acceptance criteria and answers PASS or FAIL') and when (three concrete trigger scenarios in an explicit 'Use...' clause), matching the anchor-5 pattern of clear what plus concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural trigger phrases users would actually say: 'before accepting delegated work', 'before delivering a change', 'when someone asks for a review'. Common synonyms such as 'verify', 'check my work', or 'sign off' are missing, so it falls just short of the comprehensive anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche — independent verification of delegated work against acceptance criteria before acceptance — is distinct, but 'when someone asks for a review' overlaps with general code-review skills, a closely related category, so minor conflict risk remains.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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

monkilabs/opencastle

Path

src/orchestrator/skills/fast-review/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.