CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

flow-discover

Multi-AI research using available external providers (Double Diamond Discover phase)

Quality

59%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/flow-discover/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

52%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 core execution contract is a strong, well-gated multi-step workflow with concrete commands and validation, but it is buried in a heavily duplicated, monolithic body that includes a contradicting legacy workflow section. The skill would score substantially higher by deleting the legacy half and moving banners, templates, and examples into actual bundle files. Its weakest dimensions are conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Delete the duplicated legacy section ("# Discover Workflow - Discovery Phase" through "Example Usage"), which repeats Steps 1-2 verbatim and instructs a direct orchestrate.sh call the contract prohibits — this alone removes ~300 lines

Move the banner templates, Dev/Knowledge presentation templates, security-framing details, and example transcripts into reference files (e.g. references/presentation.md, references/security-framing.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview, and ensure cited files like skill-security-framing.md actually exist in the bundle

Define or resolve undefined placeholders (${PROMPT}, ${codex_status}, ${INTENSITY}) at the point of first use so snippets are copy-paste executable

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The 840-line body duplicates content heavily: context-detection and banner instructions appear twice (the EXECUTION CONTRACT's Steps 1-2 and again verbatim under "# Discover Workflow - Discovery Phase"), the contract steps are re-summarized a third time in "Implementation Instructions", the Dev/Knowledge banner templates are near-identical pairs, plus ASCII art and generic TaskCreate boilerplate. This matches anchor 2 ("Noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections") rather than 1, since the padding is duplication, not explanations of concepts Claude already knows.

2 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is mostly executable: exact script paths (orchestrate.sh probe-single, build-fleet.sh, state-manager.sh), a complete Agent prompt template, an intensity-to-fleet-size table, and per-step error handling. Not 5: the legacy "How It Works" section instructs a direct "orchestrate.sh discover" call that the contract explicitly prohibits, and placeholders like ${PROMPT} and ${codex_status} are never defined, leaving minor gaps and one contradiction.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The execution contract lays out a clearly sequenced, blocking Step 1-7 flow with explicit validation checkpoints (research-verify gate, synthesis-file existence checks), a minimum-2-results threshold, graceful degradation rules, and per-step error handling with feedback loops. Not 5: the appended legacy section presents a second, conflicting workflow (single orchestrate.sh call, background_task examples) that contradicts the contract and muddies which sequence governs; validation itself is thorough, so 3 would undervalue it.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is an 840-line monolithic SKILL.md with no references/, scripts/, or assets/ bundle; banner templates, presentation templates, security-framing details, example transcripts, and state-update code that clearly belong in separate files are all inlined. The two files it does cite ("skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md" and "skill-security-framing.md") are dangling — not present in the bundle. Matches anchor 2 ("content that clearly belongs in separate files is inlined; or references are buried") — not 3, since hundreds of lines of separable material are inlined and the one signaled reference is unverifiable.

2 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

48%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 names its domain but relies on a single generic action and framework jargon, with no explicit "when to use" trigger guidance. It is moderately distinct within its workflow family yet weak as a standalone trigger surface. Adding concrete capability verbs and a natural trigger clause would move it up a full level.

Suggestions

Add 2-3 concrete actions, e.g. "Dispatches research probes to available external AI CLIs (Codex, Antigravity, Perplexity), synthesizes multi-perspective findings into a cited report"

Add an explicit trigger clause such as "Use when the user asks to research, compare, or investigate a topic across multiple AI providers" (the missing 'Use when' clause currently caps completeness at 3)

Replace or supplement "Double Diamond Discover phase" jargon with natural user vocabulary (e.g. "research phase", "exploratory research") so the skill triggers on phrases users actually say

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Multi-AI research" names the domain, but the only action stated is the generic "research using available external providers" — no concrete actions (dispatching probes to external CLIs, building an agent fleet, synthesizing multi-perspective findings) appear. This matches anchor 2 ("Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic") rather than 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions, and not 1 because the domain is specifically named.

2 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is stated ("Multi-AI research using available external providers"), but the "when" is only weakly implied by the "(Double Diamond Discover phase)" parenthetical with no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, capping this at 3 per the rubric guidelines. Not 4, because the when-condition is never made explicit.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"research" is a natural term a user would say, and "Multi-AI" / "external providers" are relevant domain keywords, but common variations and synonyms are missing (multi-provider, provider names, compare, investigate, web research). "Double Diamond Discover phase" is framework jargon users would not naturally say, matching anchor 3 ("Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms") — not 4, since several natural terms users would actually speak are absent.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The "Double Diamond Discover phase" parenthetical carves a clear niche distinct from sibling workflow phases (define/tangle/ink), with only minor overlap risk against generic research skills since "research" alone is broad. Not 5 because no distinct trigger phrases disambiguate it at invocation time, and not 3 because the multi-AI plus phase framing is more specific than anchor-3-level overlap.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (859 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

nyldn/claude-octopus

Path

skills/flow-discover/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.