okr-design

OKR design as actually shipped, not as conference-talk theory. Outcome statements that drive decisions, key results that measure the right thing, scoring discipline, mid-quarter recalibration, and the difference between sandbagged OKRs (always 100%) and aspirational OKRs (always 30%) and stretch OKRs (genuine ambition with quarterly accountability). Triggers on OKR design, OKR setting, key result design, OKR scoring, mid-quarter recalibration, OKR cascading, outcomes vs outputs, quarterly planning, goal setting. Also triggers when a team's OKRs are always hit and producing no learning, when OKRs are demoralizing because they were set as fantasy, or when the team uses OKR vocabulary but the practice has decayed.

Quality

78%

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/okr-design/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%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.

A well-structured, actionable methodology skill that uses progressive disclosure cleanly with real reference files. Weakest on conciseness (keystone framing repeated across many sections) and workflow clarity (sequence present but validation checkpoints implicit rather than explicit).

Suggestions

State the sandbagged/aspirational/stretch keystone once in its dedicated section and reference it elsewhere instead of restating it in the intro, common-failures list, 12-consideration framework, and closing.

Add an explicit validate/check step to the 12-consideration walkthrough (e.g., 'after drafting OKRs, run the four-quarter litmus test on the prior cycle before finalizing') so the workflow has a concrete checkpoint rather than an implicit one.

Trim rhetorical framing like 'as actually shipped, not as conference-talk theory' and 'conference talks gloss over' to one occurrence; the opinionated voice lands without repetition.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The methodology is content-rich rather than filler, but the sandbagged/aspirational/stretch keystone is restated across the intro, its dedicated section, common failures, the 12-consideration framework, and the closing, and rhetorical flourishes ('conference talks gloss over', 'as actually shipped, not as conference-talk theory') recur, so it could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, specific guidance throughout: the 60-70% stretch target, the four-quarter litmus test, the 0.0-1.0 scoring scale, the 3-5 KR rule, the 12-consideration framework, and worked examples with real numbers ('from 32% to 45%'), with only minor gaps in coverage.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 12-consideration framework and the review cadence (weekly / mid-quarter / end-of-quarter / retro) give a clear sequence and the litmus test acts as a checkpoint, but there are no explicit validate-then-proceed feedback loops and checkpoints remain mostly implicit.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Each body section ends with a clearly signaled one-level-deep 'Detail in [references/X.md]' pointer, all nine referenced files exist in ./references/, and a dedicated Reference files section lists each with a one-line description, yielding easy navigation with no nested references.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

91%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.

A strong, comprehensive description that clearly states capabilities, gives extensive natural trigger terms, and explicitly covers both what and when. Minor deduction for noun-phrase capabilities with light rhetorical framing and slight overlap risk on the broadest planning triggers.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the OKR domain and multiple concrete sub-capabilities ('outcome statements that drive decisions, key results that measure the right thing, scoring discipline, mid-quarter recalibration') plus the sandbagged/aspirational/stretch distinction, but the capabilities are noun-phrases rather than crisp verb-led actions and carry light rhetorical padding ('not as conference-talk theory').	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what (OKR design components and the sandbagged/aspirational/stretch distinction) and when (a literal 'Triggers on ...' clause plus 'Also triggers when ...' symptom scenarios), matching the anchor for concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'Triggers on OKR design, OKR setting, key result design, OKR scoring, mid-quarter recalibration, OKR cascading, outcomes vs outputs, quarterly planning, goal setting' gives comprehensive, natural-term coverage including synonyms, plus secondary decay-symptom triggers a user would actually voice.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The OKR-design niche is clear and the body explicitly separates it from roadmap/metrics/launch skills, but broad triggers like 'quarterly planning' and 'goal setting' create minor overlap risk with general planning or strategy skills.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

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

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: rampstackco/claude-skills
Path: skills/okr-design/SKILL.md
Commit: a67dd34

Reviewed: 13 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.