full-stack-orchestration-full-stack-feature

Use when working with full stack orchestration full stack feature

Quality

32%

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/full-stack-orchestration-full-stack-feature/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 well-structured, actionable multi-agent orchestration playbook with concrete prompts, but it is weakened by conceptual padding, the absence of explicit inter-phase validation gates, and a monolithic layout with no progressive disclosure into reference files.

Suggestions

Remove the bracketed 'Extended thinking' paragraph and the generic 'Clarify goals / Apply best practices' filler; the concrete phased steps already convey the intent without padding.

Add explicit validation checkpoints between phases (e.g. 'Confirm API contracts from Phase 1 are approved before starting Phase 2 implementation') to turn the implicit sequence into a gated workflow.

Split the per-step prompts into reference files (e.g. references/phase1-prompts.md) and link to them from a concise overview in SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly task-oriented, but the bracketed 'Extended thinking' paragraph and the generic filler lines ('Clarify goals...', 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') explain concepts and add padding Claude could infer, fitting the 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation' anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	Each of the 12 steps specifies a concrete Task-tool invocation with a subagent_type and a detailed, copy-paste-ready prompt plus expected output, matching the 'fully executable guidance; specific examples; copy-paste ready' anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Phases 1-4 and steps 1-12 are clearly sequenced with per-step context, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops between phases — convergence is only implied in 'Coordination Notes', fitting the 'steps listed but validation gaps' anchor.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is well-organized into headed phases, but no bundle files exist and all 12 steps live inline in one monolithic SKILL.md, so content that would benefit from being split into separate references is not separated, matching the 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

0%Weight 40%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 is essentially a restatement of the skill name with a 'Use when' wrapper — it conveys no concrete capabilities, no natural trigger terms, and no real distinctiveness. It sits at the bottom of every dimension.

Suggestions

Replace the name restatement with concrete actions, e.g. 'Orchestrate end-to-end full-stack feature delivery: design database/backend/frontend architecture, implement services, run contract/E2E tests, and deploy with CI/CD.'

Add natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'full-stack feature', 'API-first development', 'backend + frontend + infrastructure', or 'greenfield feature delivery'.

Keep the explicit 'Use when...' clause but pair it with a clear 'what' statement so both halves of completeness are satisfied.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names no concrete actions — 'Use when working with full stack orchestration full stack feature' only restates the skill name, matching the vague 'no actions; abstract language' anchor rather than naming capabilities like the level-2/3 examples.	1 / 3
Completeness	It supplies a weak 'when' clause but completely omits what the skill does, so it fails the 'both what AND when' bar and falls into the 'missing what OR when' level-1 anchor.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'full stack orchestration full stack feature' is a garbled, redundant buzzword string rather than natural phrasing a user would say, fitting the 'no natural keywords; technical jargon or overly generic' anchor.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The generic, repetitive phrase would plausibly match many development skills and offers no distinct niche, matching the 'very generic; would conflict with many skills' anchor.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/full-stack-orchestration-full-stack-feature/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

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.