discovery-question-form

Structured clarification form for unresolved material requirements.

Quality

63%

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 ./plugins/_official/atoms/discovery-question-form/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

93%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 a tight, executable specification of the question-form protocol with a concrete example and clear lifecycle from activation to convergence. It is well-structured for a simple single-purpose skill with no wasted tokens.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean and efficient throughout; assumes Claude's competence, defines only the non-obvious protocol contract, and every section earns its place with no padded concept explanations.	5 / 5
Actionability	Provides a complete, copy-paste-ready HTML block plus an exhaustive field schema with exact semantics, covering the common cases concretely.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The activation-boundary, emission-shape, and convergence sections sequence the protocol clearly with an explicit completion check, but no explicit validation/retry checkpoint for malformed submissions.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Under 50 lines, single-purpose, with well-organized section headers and no need for external references; fits the simple-skill exception cleanly.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

33%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 concisely states what the skill does but omits any 'Use when' trigger guidance and uses jargon over natural user phrasing, leaving it hard to surface at the right moment. It is a clear, specific niche but underspecified on when to apply.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the active skill identifies unresolved material requirements that would change the design direction.'

Replace jargon with natural phrases a user might say, such as 'clarification questions' or 'discovery questions'.

List a couple of concrete trigger terms (e.g. 'brief', 'clarifying questions', 'unresolved requirements') to improve natural keyword coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('clarification form') and one concrete action (surfaces a structured form), but lacks comprehensive coverage of multiple specific actions.	3 / 5
Completeness	States a clear 'what' but provides no 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness low per the rubric.	2 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Uses technical phrasing ('clarification form', 'material requirements') with no natural keywords a user would actually say when needing this skill.	2 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'structured clarification form' niche is somewhat distinct, but the wording is generic enough that it could overlap with related requirements-gathering skills.	3 / 5
	Total	10 / 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: nexu-io/open-design
Path: plugins/_official/atoms/discovery-question-form/SKILL.md
Commit: 1a7a23d

Reviewed: about 7 hours 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.