idea-parking

Park interesting ideas for later consideration, resurface them periodically, and promote to commitments when ready.

Quality

77%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/idea-parking/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

87%

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

The content is concise, actionable, and well-organized for a simple instruction-only skill. The main gap is the lack of validation/feedback checkpoints in the destructive promote and dismiss flows, which prevents workflow clarity from reaching full marks.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification step before destructive overwrites, e.g. confirm the parked idea file exists via memory_read before overwriting, and handle the missing-file case.

For promotion, specify that the commitment in projects/commitments/open/ must be created (verified) before the parked-idea file is cleared, mirroring the parking flow's write-then-confirm ordering.

State what 'empty content' means concretely (e.g. overwrite with a frontmatter stub marking status: promoted/dismissed) so the destructive action is auditable rather than a silent deletion.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place.	3 / 3
Actionability	Guidance is concrete and copy-ready — exact file paths, exact tool calls (memory_write, memory_read, memory_tree with depth=1), a full frontmatter template, and prescribed confirmation phrasing — which for an instruction-only skill meets the executable-guidance bar.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The parking flow has an explicit execution order and a write-success checkpoint, but the promoting and dismissing flows perform destructive overwrites with no validation or feedback loop, which caps workflow clarity at 2 per the destructive-operation guideline.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is under 50 lines, needs no external references, and is organized into four clearly delimited sections, meeting the simple-skill bar for progressive disclosure on organization alone.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

67%

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 specific and occupies a distinct niche, but it omits explicit 'Use when' trigger guidance and does not embed the natural user phrases that would make it trigger reliably. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger terms would lift completeness and trigger_term_quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when the user says "park this", "save for later", or wants to defer an idea without dropping it.'

Weave natural trigger phrases ('park this', 'save for later', 'backburner', 'revisit later') directly into the description so trigger_term_quality reaches full coverage.

Keep the third-person voice and concrete action verbs; the current specificity is already strong.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists three distinct concrete actions — 'Park interesting ideas', 'resurface them periodically', and 'promote to commitments' — matching the anchor for multiple specific concrete actions rather than a single domain-plus-action.	3 / 3
Completeness	It clearly answers what the skill does but provides no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The description references recognizable concepts ('interesting ideas', 'later consideration') but omits the natural trigger phrases a user would actually say (e.g. 'park this', 'save for later', 'backburner'), so coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The idea-parking/commitments niche is clearly scoped and unlikely to collide with other skills, matching the anchor for a clear niche with distinct triggers.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 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: nearai/ironclaw
Path: skills/idea-parking/SKILL.md
Commit: b60038b

Reviewed: 2 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.