orchestrate
Wire Commands, Agents, and Skills together for complex features. Use when building features that need research, planning, and implementation phases.
61
51%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/orchestrate/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
67%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 has good structural completeness with an explicit 'Use when' clause, but lacks specificity in concrete actions and natural trigger terms. The domain concepts (Commands, Agents, Skills) are framework-specific jargon that may not match how users naturally phrase requests, and the trigger condition ('features that need research, planning, and implementation phases') is broad enough to cause overlap with other skills.
Suggestions
Add more concrete actions such as 'orchestrate multi-step workflows,' 'chain agent calls,' or 'coordinate research-then-implement pipelines' to improve specificity.
Include natural user trigger terms like 'orchestrate,' 'multi-step,' 'workflow,' 'pipeline,' 'coordinate agents,' or 'complex task' to improve discoverability.
Narrow the 'Use when' clause to reduce conflict risk, e.g., 'Use when the user needs to chain multiple agents or commands into a coordinated workflow with distinct research, planning, and implementation stages.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names some domain concepts ('Commands, Agents, and Skills') and mentions 'research, planning, and implementation phases,' but doesn't list concrete actions like 'create orchestration pipelines' or 'define agent workflows.' The actions remain somewhat abstract. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Explicitly answers both 'what' ('Wire Commands, Agents, and Skills together for complex features') and 'when' ('Use when building features that need research, planning, and implementation phases'), with a clear 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms like 'Commands,' 'Agents,' 'Skills,' 'research,' 'planning,' and 'implementation phases,' but these are fairly framework-specific jargon. Missing natural user terms like 'orchestrate,' 'multi-step workflow,' 'pipeline,' or 'complex task coordination.' | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description targets orchestration of Commands/Agents/Skills which is somewhat specific, but 'building features that need research, planning, and implementation phases' is broad enough to overlap with general project planning or implementation skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a useful conceptual framework for multi-phase feature development but falls short on actionability — it describes what to do without showing how to do it. The workflow structure is clear at a high level but lacks the concrete commands, agent invocation syntax, and specific validation criteria needed for Claude to execute this pattern. The references to agents and systems (scout, orchestrator, pro-workflow, hooks) without links or concrete details leave significant gaps.
Suggestions
Add concrete examples of how to invoke each agent (e.g., exact command syntax or tool calls for scout, orchestrator, reviewer agents)
Define what 'quality gates every 5 edits' means concretely — what checks are run, what thresholds apply, and what happens on failure
Link to or reference the specific configuration/definition files for the agents mentioned in the Agent Selection table
Add a concrete end-to-end example showing a feature request flowing through all four phases with actual commands and outputs
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient but includes some sections that could be tightened. The 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections add value but the 'Integration with Pro-Workflow' section is vague and doesn't earn its tokens. The ASCII diagram is helpful but slightly verbose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill describes a process at a high level but provides no concrete commands, executable code, or specific examples of how to invoke agents, set up quality gates, or configure the workflow. References to 'orchestrator agent', 'scout agent', 'reviewer agent' lack any concrete invocation syntax or configuration details. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are listed in a clear sequence with a visual diagram, and there's a GO/HOLD gate and approval checkpoint. However, validation steps are vague ('quality gates every 5 edits' without specifying what those gates check), and there's no concrete feedback loop for error recovery or what to do when a gate fails. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is reasonably structured with clear sections and a table for agent selection. However, it references agents (scout, orchestrator, reviewer, debugger) and concepts (pro-workflow, self-correction loop, hooks) without linking to any documentation or configuration files where these are defined. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- rohitg00/pro-workflow
- Commit
1de1554
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.