CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

plan-interrogate

Stress-test a plan by walking its decision tree one question at a time. Use when the user wants to pressure-test a design before implementation.

Quality

82%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%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.

An exemplary instruction-only skill body: a tightly sequenced method with built-in validation checkpoints and an explicit exit condition, concrete output formats and file conventions, and terse anti-patterns that assume the model's intelligence. The only real improvement space is adding a one-line worked example of the ledger output and trimming a couple of rationale sentences.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence throughout — no basic-concept explanations, no padding — with every rule stated as a terse imperative. It is not a 5 because a few lines spend tokens on rationale rather than instruction (e.g., "This is what stops the agent from using twenty words where one will do next session"), and not a 3 because such instances are minor and isolated.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance for an instruction-only skill: exact ledger format ("Decision - Choice - Source (user | inferred: <path>)"), a concrete file location and collision-avoidance rule for decision records ("docs/decisions/NNNN-slug.md... number from the highest existing record"), and DEFERRED semantics. It falls short of 5 only because no worked example of a ledger line or a sample question is given; it is above 3 because the guidance is specific and directly executable, not pseudocode.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The seven-step Method is clearly sequenced with dependency ordering, explicit validation checkpoints ("Do not proceed on a mis-restatement"; "Before asking, check whether the answer already lives in the codebase"), feedback loops (the user confirms, picks another option, or pushes back), and an unambiguous exit criterion ("Exit only when zero nodes are open"). This matches the top anchor's sequence plus validation plus error-recovery loop; the operations are non-destructive so no additional validation cap applies.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is self-contained with no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ do not exist) and nothing inlined that belongs in a separate file; sections (Method, Anti-patterns, Outputs, Output contract) are well organized and easy to navigate. No nested or dangling references exist, fitting the top anchor's appropriate content placement for a single-file skill.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

A well-formed description in third person with an explicit use-when clause and natural trigger phrasing. Its main weakness is limited specificity — it conveys the core interrogation action but omits the concrete artifacts the skill produces, and trigger coverage could include more user-facing synonyms.

Suggestions

Add one or two concrete deliverables to the description (e.g., "...one question at a time, producing a decision ledger") so the what-coverage is more comprehensive.

Broaden the when-clause with additional natural trigger phrasings such as "validate a design", "review a plan", or "finalize decisions before coding".

Consider naming the pre-implementation decision-resolution purpose more explicitly to further separate it from generic plan-review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Stress-test a plan by walking its decision tree one question at a time" names the domain and one concrete action, but coverage of what the skill produces (ledger, CONTEXT.md, decision records) is absent from the description. This matches the anchor for naming the domain with 1-2 concrete actions; it is not score 4 because several specific actions are not listed, and not score 2 because the action given is concrete rather than generic.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the what ("Stress-test a plan by walking its decision tree one question at a time") and the when ("Use when the user wants to pressure-test a design before implementation"). It is not a 5 because the when-clause covers a single trigger phrasing rather than multiple concrete trigger phrases, and not a 3 because the when is explicitly stated, not merely implied.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Stress-test a plan", "pressure-test a design", and "before implementation" are natural phrases a user would say, giving good keyword coverage. It falls short of a 5 because common variations like "review my plan", "validate the design", or "finalize the plan before coding" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The plan/decision-tree interrogation niche with triggers like "stress-test a plan" and "pressure-test a design before implementation" is mostly distinct. Minor overlap risk remains with generic plan-review or design-discussion skills, keeping it below the clear-niche anchor at 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

rohitg00/pro-workflow

Path

skills/plan-interrogate/SKILL.md

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.