conductor-status

Display project status, active tracks, and next actions

Quality

36%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/conductor-status/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

39%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill provides a thorough specification for displaying project status but suffers from extreme verbosity—the output format templates alone consume the majority of the document and could be dramatically condensed or moved to reference files. The workflow structure is solid with good error handling, but the Instructions section is ironically vague while the output templates are over-specified. The skill reads more like a product requirements document than a concise skill for Claude.

Suggestions

Drastically reduce the output format section: provide one brief example template and let Claude adapt, rather than spelling out every possible output variant (full, single track, quick, JSON, errors) inline.

Move the detailed output templates to a separate reference file (e.g., `resources/output-templates.md`) and reference it from the main skill.

Replace the vague Instructions section ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs') with the actual core logic: read files, count tasks, format output.

Remove boilerplate sections ('Use this skill when', 'Do not use this skill when', 'Limitations') that add no actionable information beyond what the skill title already conveys.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is extremely verbose at ~200+ lines. It includes boilerplate sections ('Use this skill when', 'Do not use this skill when', 'Limitations') that add no value, and exhaustively spells out output templates that Claude could generate from a brief specification. The calculation logic for progress bars and task counting explains trivial operations Claude already knows.	1 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides concrete file paths, regex patterns for task counting, and detailed output format templates, which is useful. However, the actual 'Instructions' section is vague ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs'), and the calculation logic uses pseudocode rather than executable code. The data collection steps are specific but read more like a specification than executable guidance.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The workflow is clearly sequenced: pre-flight checks → data collection (4 ordered steps) → output formatting, with explicit error states for each failure mode (no tracks, not initialized, track not found). The pre-flight checks serve as validation checkpoints before proceeding.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is a monolithic wall of text with everything inline. The massive output format templates (full project status, single track status, quick mode, JSON output, error states) should be in separate reference files. There's a reference to 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' but no bundle files exist to support it, and the bulk of content that could be externalized remains inline.	1 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Description

32%Scale 1-3

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 provides a basic sense of what the skill does—displaying project status information—but lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and sufficient natural keyword coverage. It is too terse to reliably distinguish itself from other project management or task tracking skills in a large skill library.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about project status, progress, what's being worked on, or what to do next.'

Include more natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'progress', 'dashboard', 'overview', 'what's next', 'current tasks', or 'todo'.

Clarify the source or context of the data (e.g., 'Reads project tracking files to display...') to improve distinctiveness from generic project management skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names a domain (project management) and lists some actions ('display project status, active tracks, next actions'), but these are somewhat generic and don't fully specify concrete operations like how data is retrieved or what format output takes.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what the skill does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and since the 'what' is also somewhat thin, this scores a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant terms like 'project status', 'active tracks', and 'next actions' that users might say, but misses common variations like 'progress', 'tasks', 'todo', 'what's next', 'dashboard', or 'overview'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Terms like 'project status' and 'active tracks' provide some specificity, but 'next actions' and 'project status' could overlap with general task management, project planning, or todo-list skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: popey/claude-code-skills
Path: skills/conductor-status/SKILL.md
Commit: a5a6601

Reviewed: 5 days 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.