CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

skill-thought-partner

Brainstorm creatively with pattern spotting and paradox hunting — use for ideation and exploration

58

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/skill-thought-partner/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 highly actionable, well-structured playbook with concrete scripts and an exact export template, scoring high on actionability. Conciseness and progressive disclosure are solid but leave room: the monolithic file could split heavy sections into one-level-deep references and trim minor redundancy.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lengthy (~430 lines) but mostly earns its tokens with concrete scripts, tables, and exact templates; there is minor redundancy (redirect signals repeat across Phase 1 and the Redirect Handling table) that could be trimmed, and no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides a copy-paste opening script, specific probing questions per technique, an exact export-format template, a redirect-response mapping table, and concrete error-handling scripts — fully executable instruction-only guidance covering common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The four phases are clearly sequenced with per-technique success indicators and redirect/error-handling checkpoints; transitions between the four techniques are somewhat open-ended rather than gated, leaving minor validation gaps.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized with clear headers and a single cohesive playbook, but the file is monolithic (~430 lines) with a large export template and four technique write-ups inlined that could reasonably live in separate one-level-deep reference files.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 is grammatically clean and uses third-person voice with an explicit 'use for' clause, but it is light on concrete actions and the 'when' trigger guidance is generic. Distinctiveness is moderate given the broad brainstorm/ideation framing.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 concrete actions to the description (e.g., 'surfaces hidden patterns, hunts for paradoxes, and crystallizes unnamed concepts') instead of relying on abstract technique names.

Make the 'when' clause more explicit with concrete trigger phrases a user would actually say (e.g., 'use when the user wants to brainstorm, think through an idea, or find a fresh perspective').

Sharpen distinctiveness by noting what it is NOT (e.g., 'for exploration, not technical research or decision-making') to reduce overlap with sibling skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Brainstorm creatively with pattern spotting and paradox hunting') but the named techniques are abstract concepts rather than concrete executable actions; no verbs like 'generate', 'extract', or 'merge' appear.

2 / 5

Completeness

It answers both what ('brainstorm with pattern spotting and paradox hunting') and when ('use for ideation and exploration'), but the 'when' is generic and lacks concrete trigger phrases, so it sits above the missing-when cap (3) but below fully explicit.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes some natural keywords ('Brainstorm creatively', 'ideation', 'exploration') but misses common variations users say ('think through this', 'thought partner', 'fresh perspective') that appear only in the separate trigger field.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Brainstorm/ideation/exploration' is fairly distinctive via the pattern/paradox framing but still overlaps broadly with general conversation and sibling skills like decision-support and flow-discover.

3 / 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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

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.