CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

flow-parallel

Decompose and execute large changes, migrations, or multi-issue fixes in parallel with quality gates

Quality

68%

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 ./.claude/skills/flow-parallel/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

62%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.

This is a strong operational skill: the workflow is explicitly sequenced with executable validation gates and genuine error-recovery loops, and the scripts are nearly copy-paste ready. Its weaknesses are presentation — heavy redundant enforcement boilerplate that inflates the token budget, and a fully monolithic layout that inlines large scripts instead of shipping them as bundle files.

Suggestions

Move the launch.sh template and the dependency-validation/wave-assignment Python script into a scripts/ bundle directory and reference them by path, cutting roughly 150 lines from SKILL.md while keeping them executable.

Collapse the redundant enforcement text: drop the seven per-step "DO NOT PROCEED" lines and the Prohibitions section where each bullet merely restates a rule already stated inline in its step, and remove version annotations ("v8.44.0", "v8.32.0", "v8.45.0") or move them to a changelog section.

Fix the variable mismatch in Step 7's aggregation loop: it uses "$WP_COUNT" (never assigned there) while Step 5 defines "wp_count" — define it once from wbs.json at the top of the aggregation snippet so the script runs as written.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is noticeably verbose: seven repeated "DO NOT PROCEED TO STEP N until..." lines, an 11-bullet Prohibitions section largely restating rules already stated inline, a "STOP - SKILL ALREADY LOADED" header, and version-stamped annotations ("v8.44.0", "v8.32.0", "v8.45.0") that add time-sensitive noise. It is above anchor 1 because it does not explain concepts Claude already knows — nearly all content is operational — but the systematic enforcement boilerplate constitutes several padded sections.

2 / 5

Actionability

The skill provides mostly executable guidance: a complete copy-paste-ready launch.sh with fail-closed error handling, a runnable dependency-validation/wave-assignment Python script, validation-gate check snippets, and worked examples. It misses anchor 5 on minor gaps — Step 7's aggregation loop references "$WP_COUNT" which is never assigned in that sequence (Step 5 defines lowercase "wp_count"), and the instructions.md template is intentionally placeholder-driven.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 7-step sequence is explicit, each step ends in a named validation gate with an executable check (wbs_generated, instructions_written, processes_launched, all_work_packages_complete), and the Error Handling section provides feedback loops (read agent.log, retry failed WPs individually, timeout reporting with kill/wait options). The Prohibitions section functions as a checklist for this batch operation, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Step-based headers give the document real structure, but there is no bundle at all (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories) and content that clearly belongs in separate files is inlined — notably the 100+ line launch.sh template and the dependency-validation/wave Python script would fit naturally in a scripts/ bundle file. It is not anchor 2 because the structure is present and navigable; not anchor 4 because substantial executable content that should be externalized remains inline in SKILL.md.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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 communicates a clear capability niche with reasonably natural trigger terms, but it reads as half-finished: it states what the skill does without any explicit "when to use it" guidance, capping its completeness. Adding a trigger clause and natural synonyms (e.g., "batch", "parallelize") would lift two dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g., "Use when the user asks to parallelize, batch, or fan out a compound task — such as migrating many files at once or fixing several issues concurrently."

Include natural synonyms and variations users would say: "batch", "in parallel", "fan out", "multiple issues at once", "team of agents" — note that "batch" is already a skill alias but absent from the description.

Enumerate the full action pipeline (decompose into work packages, launch independent agents, monitor with quality gates, aggregate results) to make the capability coverage more comprehensive.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("large changes, migrations, or multi-issue fixes") and two concrete actions ("decompose and execute ... in parallel with quality gates"), but omits other key actions such as spawning independent work packages, monitoring, and aggregating results. It sits at anchor 3 rather than 4 because it does not list several specific concrete actions with comprehensive coverage.

3 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear ("Decompose and execute large changes, migrations, or multi-issue fixes in parallel with quality gates"), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance; the "when" is only weakly implied by the listed task types. Per the judging guidelines, a missing "Use when" clause caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like "migrations", "multi-issue fixes", and "in parallel" are phrases users would naturally say when needing this skill. It falls short of anchor 5 because natural synonyms such as "batch", "fan out", or "parallelize" are absent (notably "batch" is one of the skill's aliases yet does not appear in the description).

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche — parallel decomposition and execution of compound tasks with quality gates — making it mostly distinct from other skills. It is not a 5 because it could still overlap with other orchestration, multi-agent, or subagent-fanout skills without more distinctive trigger phrasing.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (878 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

nyldn/claude-octopus

Path

.claude/skills/flow-parallel/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.