team-collaboration-standup-notes

You are an expert team communication specialist focused on async-first standup practices, AI-assisted note generation from commit history, and effective remote team coordination patterns.

Quality

31%

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/team-collaboration-standup-notes/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

22%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is reasonably organized but largely generic: instructions are boilerplate applicable to any skill, with no concrete workflow, examples, or validation steps, and its only reference points to a missing file. It needs task-specific executable guidance to be useful.

Suggestions

Replace the generic "Instructions" bullets with a concrete sequenced workflow (e.g. gather sources -> extract commits/tickets -> draft sections -> validate completeness -> emit notes) with verification steps.

Add specific, executable detail: example commit-to-accomplishment transformations, the note format/template, and how to query each MCP integration.

Create the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md (or remove the broken reference) so progressive disclosure resolves to a real file.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is short and not bloated, but the "Instructions" bullets ("Clarify goals", "Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes") are generic boilerplate that could apply to any skill, and the Context paragraph restates well-known concepts about async standups.	2 / 3
Actionability	The guidance is abstract ("Provide actionable steps and verification") with no concrete commands, code, formats, or examples; it describes what to do rather than instructing how, and the listed MCP integrations lack usage detail.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no sequenced multi-step workflow or validation checkpoint for the source-analysis/generation process; the "Instructions" section is an unordered list of vague directives with no feedback loop.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections (Use when / Context / Requirements / Instructions / Resources) provide some structure and the body points to resources/implementation-playbook.md, but that file and directory do not exist, so the one-level-deep reference is broken.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Description

40%

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 reads as a persona statement rather than a capability/trigger spec: it names the domain but uses second-person framing and omits any "Use when" trigger. It is distinguishable but would benefit from concrete actions and explicit usage triggers.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person with concrete action verbs (e.g. "Generates async standup notes by analyzing Obsidian, Jira, Git commits, and calendar events").

Add an explicit trigger clause: "Use when preparing daily standup notes, async updates, or summarizing a day's commits and tickets."

Drop the persona phrasing ("You are an expert...") to avoid the voice penalty and improve specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description uses abstract persona framing ("You are an expert team communication specialist focused on...") with no concrete action verbs like generate, extract, or format; the rubric's second-person penalty ("You are...") reduces specificity by one from a base of 2.	1 / 3
Completeness	It partially answers "what" (note generation, coordination) but provides no explicit "when/Use when..." trigger guidance, which the rubric caps at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces some natural terms users might say ("standup practices", "commit history", "team coordination"), but lacks a trigger clause and misses common variations like "standup notes", "daily update", or "standup".	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The standup-notes niche is identifiable, but the broad "team communication specialist" / "remote team coordination" framing could overlap with generic collaboration or communication skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 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/team-collaboration-standup-notes/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

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.