Validation
75%| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md line count is 241 (<= 500) | Pass |
frontmatter_valid | YAML frontmatter is valid | Pass |
name_field | 'name' field is valid: 'subagent-driven-development' | Pass |
description_field | 'description' field is valid (85 chars) | Pass |
description_voice | 'description' uses third person voice | Pass |
description_trigger_hint | Description includes an explicit trigger hint | Pass |
compatibility_field | 'compatibility' field not present (optional) | Pass |
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' field not present (optional) | Pass |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
metadata_field | 'metadata' field not present (optional) | Pass |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | No unknown frontmatter keys found | Pass |
body_present | SKILL.md body is present | Pass |
body_examples | Examples detected (code fence or 'Example' wording) | Pass |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Passed |
Implementation
85%This is a strong skill document with excellent workflow clarity and actionability. The two-stage review process is well-documented with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops. The main weakness is some verbosity in the advantages section and example workflow that could be tightened without losing clarity.
Suggestions
- Trim the advantages section - many points (like 'fresh context per task') are already clear from the process description and don't need re-stating
- Consider shortening the example workflow to show just 1-2 tasks with the review loop, rather than the full extended example
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy - the advantages section repeats concepts already clear from the process, and the example workflow is quite lengthy. The dot diagrams add value but the text explanations sometimes duplicate what the diagrams show. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, actionable guidance with specific prompt template references, clear process steps, and a detailed example workflow showing exact dialogue patterns. The red flags section gives specific do/don't guidance that's immediately applicable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent workflow clarity with explicit validation checkpoints (spec compliance review, then code quality review), clear feedback loops (reviewer finds issues → implementer fixes → re-review), and a detailed process diagram showing the complete sequence including error recovery paths. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear overview, process diagram, and references to external prompt templates (./implementer-prompt.md, etc.) and related skills. Content is appropriately split with one-level-deep references clearly signaled in the Prompt Templates and Integration sections. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Activation
7%This description is severely lacking in specificity and actionable detail. It tells Claude when to use the skill but fails to explain what the skill actually does or what concrete capabilities it provides. The technical jargon makes it unlikely to match natural user requests.
Suggestions
- Add specific concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Parallelizes task execution, manages task dependencies, tracks completion status').
- Include natural trigger terms users would actually say (e.g., 'run tasks in parallel', 'execute multiple tasks', 'batch processing', 'concurrent execution').
- Expand the 'what' portion to clearly describe the skill's capabilities before the 'Use when' clause.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'executing implementation plans' and 'independent tasks' without specifying concrete actions. No specific capabilities are listed. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | While it attempts to answer 'when' with 'Use when...', the 'what' is extremely weak. 'Executing implementation plans' doesn't explain what the skill actually does or what capabilities it provides. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The terms 'implementation plans' and 'independent tasks' are technical jargon unlikely to be naturally used by users. Missing common variations or natural language triggers. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The phrase 'independent tasks in the current session' provides some specificity that distinguishes it from general task execution, but 'implementation plans' is vague enough to potentially overlap with many planning or execution skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
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.