CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

writing-plans

Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code

57

Quality

64%

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 ./.cursor/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 is a tight, highly actionable planning template with concrete TDD task structure, exact commands and expected outputs, and a clear handoff workflow. It is well-structured and self-contained, with only minor conciseness and workflow-checkpoint gaps.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and imperative with minimal over-explanation — it does not tutor Claude on what TDD or planning is — though a few framing phrases ('questionable taste', 'zero context') could be trimmed, fitting 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation'.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides a copy-paste plan header template, a full task skeleton with exact file paths and line ranges, exact `pytest ... -v` commands paired with expected FAIL/PASS output, and exact git commit commands — fully executable examples covering the common task case.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear sequence (announce → write bite-sized TDD plan → save → execution handoff with two paths) is present with per-task validate-then-proceed checkpoints and expected-output feedback loops; the only gap is no explicit validate-the-whole-plan checkpoint before handoff, fitting 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single self-contained SKILL.md with clear section headers and no nested file references (the `superpowers:`/`@` references are cross-skill handoffs, not file references); it is well-organized but at ~115 lines exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception that would warrant a 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

47%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 a clear, natural 'Use when...' trigger but omits what the skill actually does, leaving the 'what' unspecified. Trigger phrasing is idiomatic but lacks synonyms; the niche is reasonably distinct.

Suggestions

Add a 'what' clause stating the concrete action, e.g. 'Write comprehensive, bite-sized implementation plans...'.

Include natural synonyms users might say ('plan', 'implementation plan', 'break down a task', 'step-by-step plan') to broaden trigger coverage.

Combine into one sentence: 'Write comprehensive implementation plans with bite-sized TDD tasks. Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code') but states no concrete action the skill performs — the 'what' (write implementation plans) is absent, matching the 'names domain but actions minimal/generic' anchor rather than the 3 which requires 1-2 concrete actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit ('Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code') but the 'what' is entirely missing — the description never says the skill produces implementation plans — matching the 'only when is present without what' anchor.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases users would say ('spec', 'requirements', 'multi-step task', 'before touching code') are present and idiomatic, but coverage is thin on synonyms (no 'plan', 'break down', 'step-by-step', 'implementation'), placing it at good-but-not-comprehensive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The pre-code planning niche is fairly specific and distinguishable from execution/build skills, with only minor overlap risk against general brainstorming or structuring skills, fitting 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk'.

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
revokslab/ShipFree
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.