example-workflow
Use when demonstrating plugin workflow features - shows how skills can guide multi-step processes
35
17%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./examples/full-featured-plugin/skills/workflow/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description fails across all dimensions. It describes a meta-purpose (demonstrating features) rather than actual functionality, uses abstract technical language instead of concrete actions, and lacks any natural trigger terms users would employ. The description appears to be for a demo/example skill but provides no useful information for skill selection.
Suggestions
Replace abstract language with specific concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Creates project scaffolding, generates boilerplate code, sets up configuration files').
Add natural trigger terms users would actually say (e.g., 'new project', 'setup', 'initialize', 'scaffold').
Rewrite the 'Use when' clause to describe actual user scenarios rather than demonstration purposes (e.g., 'Use when the user wants to start a new project or needs help with initial setup').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'demonstrating plugin workflow features' and 'guide multi-step processes' without specifying any concrete actions. No specific capabilities are listed. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is extremely vague (shows how skills can guide processes) and while it has a 'Use when' clause, the trigger is about 'demonstrating' rather than actual user tasks. Both components are very weak. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains technical jargon ('plugin workflow features', 'multi-step processes') that users would not naturally say. No natural keywords or common user phrases are included. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so generic ('multi-step processes', 'workflow features') that it could conflict with virtually any skill that involves workflows or processes. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like documentation about how to write skills rather than an actionable skill itself. It describes concepts and patterns abstractly without providing concrete, executable guidance. The workflow steps are high-level placeholders rather than specific instructions Claude could follow.
Suggestions
Replace abstract workflow steps with concrete, executable examples - show actual code or commands for each step rather than describing what 'would' happen
Add specific validation checkpoints with concrete verification commands or criteria (e.g., 'Run `python validate.py` to confirm output')
Provide actual file paths and links to referenced components (references/, scripts/) rather than just mentioning they exist
Remove meta-commentary about what the skill 'demonstrates' and instead directly provide the guidance Claude should follow
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient but includes some meta-explanation about what the skill demonstrates rather than providing direct, actionable guidance. Phrases like 'This skill demonstrates how to...' add overhead. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The content is entirely abstract and descriptive. No concrete code, commands, or executable examples are provided. Steps like 'Gather requirements' and 'Plan approach' are vague directions without specific implementation details. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are listed in sequence but lack validation checkpoints, concrete actions, or feedback loops. The workflow describes what would happen conceptually rather than providing executable guidance with verification steps. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content mentions integration with references/, scripts/, and other components but doesn't provide actual links or clear navigation. References are described abstractly rather than being well-signaled with actual paths. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 13 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
Total | 13 / 16 Passed | |
- Commit
74afe93
- 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.