CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

debate-kickoff

Starter: frame a decision as a multi-model debate — picks sides, seats providers, and launches /octo:debate with a well-formed motion

60

Quality

70%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/octopus-starter-pack/debate-kickoff/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%

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

The body is concise, well-organized, and appropriately scoped, with clear step sequencing. It is held back only by described-rather-than-shown invocations and the absence of a dispatch-time error-recovery loop.

Suggestions

Show the actual invocation commands (e.g. the check-providers.sh call and the /octo:debate dispatch template) rather than only describing them, to make guidance copy-paste ready.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry loop for the dispatch step (e.g. on seat failure or motion rejection, re-seat and re-dispatch) to lift workflow_clarity.

Keep the current lean structure; no splitting into separate reference files is needed at this size.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and efficient with no padding or over-explanation of concepts Claude knows; every line earns its place, matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor.

3 / 3

Actionability

Names a concrete script path and a specific slash command, but invocation is described rather than templated and no runnable command is shown, matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step sequence with a seat-availability checkpoint exists, but the dispatch of paid external seats has no validate→fix→retry feedback loop, matching the 'steps listed but validation gaps' anchor.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A single-purpose skill under 50 lines with well-organized sections and a one-level reference to a real helper script; per simple_skills notes this scores 3.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

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 distinctive, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and relies on plugin-specific jargon rather than natural user phrasings. Adding explicit trigger guidance and common user terms would lift completeness and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural user phrasings, e.g. 'Use when the user wants to compare options, weigh alternatives, or get pros and cons from multiple model families'.

Replace or supplement '/octo:debate' jargon with common terms users actually say (compare options, debate a decision, second opinion) to improve trigger_term_quality.

Keep the concrete action list ('picks sides, seats providers, launches') which already reads well.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — 'picks sides, seats providers, and launches /octo:debate with a well-formed motion' — matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

States what it does clearly but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause; the 'when' is only implied by 'frame a decision', so per guidelines completeness is capped at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes 'multi-model debate' and 'decision' but leans on plugin jargon '/octo:debate' and omits common user phrasings like 'compare options' or 'pros and cons', matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche — launching a multi-model debate via Octopus — with triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
nyldn/claude-octopus
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.