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

36%

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

32%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 body is well-sectioned but content-thin: instructions are generic placeholders rather than executable guidance, there is no sequenced workflow with validation, and the single progressive-disclosure reference points to a file that is absent from the bundle. It functions more as a skeleton than an actionable skill.

Suggestions

Replace the four generic instruction bullets with a concrete sequenced workflow: gather sources (Obsidian/Jira/Git/calendar), extract accomplishments from commits, group by work area, format the standup note, and validate that each item maps to a real ticket/commit.

Add specific, executable examples — e.g. a sample git log command to extract accomplishments and a note template with Done/Today/Blockers sections.

Resolve the `resources/implementation-playbook.md` reference: either create the file in a `resources/` bundle directory or remove the reference, and make the path consistent between the Instructions and Resources sections.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is short and mostly free of padding, but the Context paragraph over-explains the value of async standups ('maintain visibility, coordinate work, and identify blockers without synchronous meetings') — concept framing Claude already knows — and the generic Instructions bullets ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs') add little.	3 / 5
Actionability	Instructions are abstract ('Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes', 'Provide actionable steps and verification') with no concrete commands, code, or specific extraction/formatting steps; the only concrete pointer is to open the playbook file, which is not present in the bundle.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is no sequenced workflow — only four generic, unordered instruction bullets with no validation checkpoints, despite the skill performing batch extraction across multiple data sources where verification of extracted accomplishments would matter.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Structure exists (Use/Do not use/Context/Requirements/Instructions/Resources) but the one referenced detail file is `resources/implementation-playbook.md`, which does not exist in the bundle, and the path is referenced inconsistently (Resources says 'resources/' while Instructions says 'resources/'); the reference is buried and unverifiable.	2 / 5
	Total	9 / 20 Passed

Description

41%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 reads as a persona statement rather than a capability-plus-trigger description: it tells Claude who to be, not what to do or when to activate. It lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause and leans on generic communication framing instead of concrete standup-note actions.

Suggestions

Rewrite as a capability statement in third person, e.g. 'Generates async daily standup notes from Git commits, Jira tickets, and Obsidian vault context.'

Add an explicit trigger clause: 'Use when the user asks for standup notes, daily check-ins, or async standup updates.'

Replace generic phrases like 'team communication specialist' and 'remote team coordination patterns' with concrete actions (extract accomplishments, format notes, surface blockers) to reduce overlap with general communication skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('async-first standup practices', 'AI-assisted note generation from commit history', 'remote team coordination patterns') but lists focus areas rather than concrete actions a user would invoke; it is more a persona description than a capability list.	3 / 5
Completeness	It gives a vague 'what' (a persona/focus) but has no 'when' trigger clause at all — there is no 'Use when...' guidance, which the rubric caps at 3 and the absence of any when pushes it toward 2.	2 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains relevant natural phrases like 'standup practices', 'commit history', and 'remote team coordination', but misses common variations such as 'standup notes', 'daily standup', 'scrum', or 'check-in' that users would actually say.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The standup-notes niche is reasonably specific and unlikely to conflict with unrelated skills, but the broad 'team communication specialist' / 'remote team coordination' framing could overlap with general communication or project-management skills.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 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: 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.