replay-learnings
Surface past learnings relevant to the current task before starting work. Searches correction history, recalls past mistakes, and applies prior patterns. Use when starting a task, saying "what do I know about", "previous mistakes", "lessons learned", or "remind me about".
82
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
94%
1.54xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/replay-learnings/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-structured description that clearly communicates both what the skill does and when it should be triggered. The trigger terms are natural and varied, covering multiple ways a user might invoke this capability. The main weakness is that the specific actions described are somewhat abstract — 'searches correction history' and 'applies prior patterns' could be more concrete about the mechanisms involved.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (past learnings/corrections) and some actions ('searches correction history, recalls past mistakes, applies prior patterns'), but the actions are somewhat abstract rather than concrete operations like 'queries a database' or 'reads log files'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Surface past learnings relevant to the current task, searches correction history, recalls past mistakes, applies prior patterns') and when ('Use when starting a task, saying "what do I know about", "previous mistakes", "lessons learned", or "remind me about"') with explicit triggers. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural trigger phrases users would actually say: 'what do I know about', 'previous mistakes', 'lessons learned', 'remind me about', and 'starting a task'. These cover common variations well. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | This skill has a clear niche — surfacing past learnings and correction history — that is distinct from general task execution or knowledge retrieval skills. The trigger terms are specific to retrospective learning and unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill has a solid structure with a clear output template and useful guardrails, making it easy to understand the intent. However, key workflow steps (checking session history, ranking by relevance) lack concrete implementation details, reducing actionability. The grep examples are a good start but the skill would benefit from more specificity on the less concrete steps.
Suggestions
Provide concrete commands or logic for step 3 ('check session history') — specify where session history is stored and how to query it, similar to the grep examples in step 2.
Define what 'ranked by relevance' means operationally in step 4 — e.g., keyword match count, frequency of application, or recency — so Claude has a concrete ranking mechanism.
Remove the flavor text opening line ('Like muscle memory...') and trim the trigger section to avoid duplicating the skill description.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The opening line 'Like muscle memory for your coding sessions' is unnecessary flavor text, and the trigger section partially duplicates the description. However, the workflow and output sections are reasonably tight without over-explaining concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The grep commands in step 2 are concrete and executable, which is good. However, steps 3 ('check session history') and 4 ('surface top learnings ranked by relevance') are vague — there's no concrete mechanism for how to check session history or how to rank relevance. The output template is helpful but is an example format, not executable logic. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step workflow is clearly sequenced and the fallback in step 5 is a nice touch. However, there's no validation checkpoint — what if the grep results are stale or the files don't exist in the expected format? Steps 3-4 lack specificity on how to actually accomplish them, leaving gaps in the process. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this size and scope (~50 lines, single-purpose), the content is well-organized into clear sections (Trigger, Workflow, Output, Guardrails) without needing external references. The structure is easy to scan and navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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
9df6af8
- 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.