example-workflow

Use when demonstrating plugin workflow features - shows how skills can guide multi-step processes

Quality

17%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./examples/full-featured-plugin/skills/workflow/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

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

Description

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

Validation

81%

Warnings & errors only

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

Repository: obra/superpowers-developing-for-claude-code
Commit: 74afe93

Reviewed: 5 months ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.