mentor

Senior Staff Engineer mentor for architecture, design decisions, technical mentorship, and career guidance. Use when seeking senior-level perspective on system design, code review, technical strategy, or career growth.

Quality

66%

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 ./plugins/dev-skills/skills/mentor/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

48%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 content is well-structured and provides a usable review template plus illustrative dialogues, but it spends many tokens restating senior-engineer persona concepts Claude already knows and inlines material that would benefit from being split into referenced files. Workflow sequencing is clear for a non-destructive advisory skill, though actionability is mixed between concrete templates and abstract question lists.

Suggestions

Trim the repeated bullet question banks and the Principles/Tone/Anti-Patterns overlap into a single concise 'Mentorship style' section; assume Claude knows what a senior engineer does and keep only non-obvious framing.

Move the full System Design Review markdown template and the Socratic example dialogues into reference files (e.g. references/review-template.md, references/dialogue-examples.md) referenced one level deep from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Convert abstract question prompts ('What's the threat model?') into a concrete review checklist with specific, named checks so the guidance is executable rather than suggestive.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is noticeably verbose — repeated bullet-list question banks across Scalability/Reliability/Maintainability/Performance/Security, a full inline review-framework template, plus separate Principles/Tone/Anti-Patterns sections restate persona concepts Claude already knows; several padded sections could be trimmed without losing utility.	2 / 5
Actionability	Some concrete guidance exists (the copy-pasteable System Design Review markdown template and example Socratic dialogues), but much of the guidance is abstract question prompts ('What's the threat model?') rather than executable steps, leaving key detail incomplete.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Task Execution section sequences the --review, --career, and general paths, and the 'When engaged for guidance' 1–6 steps give a clear order; no validation checkpoints are present but the skill is non-destructive/non-batch so that does not cap the score, leaving minor gaps at most.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The file has clear section headers and organization, but it is a single ~300-line monolith with no bundle files and no one-level-deep references; content that could be split out (the review template, example dialogues) is inlined, matching the 3-anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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 is strong: it clearly states both what the skill does and when to invoke it, using natural third-person trigger language across system design, code review, strategy, and career growth. It is specific and largely distinct, with only minor room for additional synonyms and overlap delineation.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several specific service areas — 'architecture, design decisions, technical mentorship, and career guidance' — naming the domain with multiple concrete facets rather than generic verbs; minor gaps versus the comprehensive 5-anchor.	4 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' (mentor for architecture, design decisions, technical mentorship, career guidance) and an explicit 'when' ('Use when seeking senior-level perspective on...') are clearly stated with concrete trigger phrases, matching the 5-anchor; voice is third-person with no first/second person.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural user-facing terms appear — 'system design, code review, technical strategy, or career growth' — which users would plausibly say; a few synonyms or phrasings are missing, keeping it just below the comprehensive 5-anchor.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'Senior Staff Engineer mentor' framing carves a distinct niche with mostly distinct triggers; minor overlap risk exists with dedicated code-review or architecture skills, so it sits at 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: rikdc/ai-skills
Path: plugins/dev-skills/skills/mentor/SKILL.md
Commit: cd15778

Reviewed: 2 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.