CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

dispatching-parallel-agents

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies

Quality

63%

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 ./.agents/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 delivers concrete, actionable guidance — a real prompt template, explicit decision criteria for parallel vs sequential, and a verification checklist — organized in a clear step sequence. Its main weaknesses are redundancy (the same session example told three times, overlapping summary sections) and a dated, non-executable dispatch snippet.

Suggestions

Consolidate 'Real Example from Session' and 'Real-World Impact' into a single example and merge the overlapping 'Review and Integrate' step with the 'Verification' section.

Drop the session date (2025-10-03) and the 'Key Benefits' recap, which restate the Overview without adding guidance.

Add an explicit error-recovery step after integration — e.g. what to do if agents edited the same code or the full suite still fails — to complete the validation feedback loop.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The core guidance is dense and skill-specific, but the 3-file test example is repeated in 'Agent Prompt Structure' and again in 'Real Example from Session', 'Real-World Impact' retells it a third time, 'Key Benefits' and 'Verification' restate earlier sections, and a specific session date (2025-10-03) is time-sensitive padding. This fits anchor 3 ('mostly efficient but... could be tightened') rather than anchor 2, since the excess is redundancy of useful content rather than generic filler.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, copy-adaptable agent prompt template; specific ❌/✅ mistake pairs ('Too broad: Fix all the tests' vs 'Specific: Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts'); per-agent task requirements (scope, goal, constraints, expected output); and a dispatch example. The minor gap keeping it below anchor 5 is that the Task(...) dispatch snippet is environment-illustrative rather than executable API.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear 4-step sequence (identify domains → create focused tasks → dispatch in parallel → review and integrate) plus a dedicated Verification section with checkpoints (review summaries, check conflicts, run full suite, spot check) — important since parallel agents editing code is a batch operation. It falls short of anchor 5 only because there is no explicit error-recovery feedback loop (e.g. what to do if conflicts or failures are found on integration).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the ~180-line body uses clean, well-labeled sections that are easy to navigate, with content appropriately placed for an instructional skill. It is anchor 4 ('good structure; most content appropriately placed; minor organization gaps') rather than 5 because the duplicated example sections (Real Example, Real-World Impact) could be consolidated.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

40%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 has an explicit and reasonably specific trigger condition, but it is a 'when'-only description: it never states what the skill does. It also misses the most natural trigger vocabulary ("parallel", "concurrent") in favor of technical phrasing. Adding a capability statement and natural synonyms would materially improve it.

Suggestions

Add a 'what' clause naming the concrete action, e.g. 'Dispatches one specialized agent per independent task so they run concurrently. Use when facing 2+ independent tasks...'

Include natural trigger synonyms users would actually say — "parallel", "in parallel", "concurrently", "at the same time" — alongside "independent tasks".

Replace the jargon-heavy "sequential dependencies" phrasing with a more natural equivalent such as "tasks that don't depend on each other's results".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a domain ("2+ independent tasks", "without shared state or sequential dependencies") but lists no capability actions whatsoever — there is no verb describing what the skill actually does. It fits anchor 2 ('names the domain but actions are minimal or generic') rather than anchor 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and strong ("Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies"), but the 'what' — dispatching parallel agents — is completely unstated in the description (only the name hints at it). Per the guideline to score only what is explicit, this lands between anchor 2 ('only when present without what', but with a much vaguer when) and anchor 3 ('clear what but missing when', the inverse gap); the very concrete when justifies the midpoint-plus score.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"independent tasks" is a relevant natural term, but the most common user phrasings — "parallel", "in parallel", "concurrent", "simultaneously" — are absent, and "sequential dependencies" leans technical jargon. This matches anchor 3 ('some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'), not anchor 4's good coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Triggering on a structural condition (multiple independent tasks, no shared state) is fairly distinct from domain-triggered skills, with only minor overlap risk against general delegation or multi-agent orchestration skills. It is not anchor 5 because the absence of stated capabilities leaves room for collision with other orchestration skills.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

phatblat/dotfiles

Path

.agents/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/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.