conductor-setup

Initialize project with Conductor artifacts (product definition, tech stack, workflow, style guides)

Quality

64%

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-setup/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

63%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 skill delivers concrete, actionable guidance with a clearly sequenced, validated workflow, but it is a long monolithic file containing generic boilerplate and inlined content that could be split into references. Tightening boilerplate and externalizing the Q&A script/templates would lift conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Remove the generic 'Instructions' and 'Use/Do not use' boilerplate, or replace with skill-specific triggers and concrete first steps.

Move the per-section Q&A prompts and suggested answers into a reference file (e.g., references/qa-protocol.md) and keep SKILL.md as an overview with one-level-deep links.

Add a validate→fix→retry feedback loop to the Error Handling section for file-write failures instead of only halting, to reach the workflow-clarity top anchor.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly structured but padded: the generic 'Instructions' block ('Clarify goals...', 'Apply relevant best practices...', 'Provide actionable steps and verification') and the boilerplate 'Use this skill when / Do not use this skill when' sections add little that Claude would not already infer.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete file paths, a setup_state.json schema, exact Q&A prompts with suggested answers, and full templates for index.md and tracks.md; minor gaps where product.md/guidelines/tech-stack/workflow templates are described by bullet list rather than given verbatim.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear sequence (pre-flight → Q&A → artifact generation → state management → completion → resume/error handling) with validation checkpoints ('Validate file writes succeeded', 'Verify file exists with Read tool'), but error handling halts rather than providing a validate→fix→retry feedback loop.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clear sections, but the ~426-line body is monolithic with no bundle/reference files; the full Q&A script and artifact templates are inlined rather than split into one-level-deep references, so structure could be better organized.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 conveys a clear, fairly specific purpose centered on a named tool but omits an explicit 'when to use' trigger, which caps its completeness. It is distinct and reasonably specific but would benefit from natural trigger phrasing.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural user triggers (e.g., 'Use when initializing or resuming a Conductor project, or when the user mentions Conductor setup, project scaffolding, or generating product/tech-stack/workflow docs').

Include synonyms and common phrasings users might say (e.g., 'scaffold', 'bootstrap', 'Conductor project') to improve trigger-term coverage.

Replace the generic verb 'Initialize' with a couple of concrete action verbs (create, generate, resume) to push specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete artifact actions (product definition, tech stack, workflow, style guides) anchored by 'Initialize project with Conductor artifacts', though the single verb 'initialize' is generic and coverage of the setup process is implied rather than enumerated.	4 / 5
Completeness	Clearly states the 'what' (initialize project with Conductor artifacts) but the description lacks any 'Use when...' trigger clause; per the rubric a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural domain terms ('Conductor', 'project', 'setup', 'product definition', 'tech stack', 'workflow', 'style guides') a user would plausibly say, but lacks synonyms and broader trigger phrasings.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'Conductor' name and artifact list establish a mostly distinct niche with minimal overlap, though trigger terms are limited enough to leave minor conflict risk with generic project-setup skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 5 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/conductor-setup/SKILL.md
Commit: 3eff4af

Reviewed: 1 day 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.