openspec-archive-change

Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow. Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete.

Quality

68%

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 ./eval/local/skills/benchmarks/dependency/openspec/openspec-archive-change/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

75%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 content is well-structured and highly actionable, with concrete commands and validation checkpoints appropriate for a destructive archive operation. It is held back from top marks by minor redundancy, a small gap in date-generation guidance, and lack of a retry loop / post-archive verification.

Suggestions

Add an explicit post-archive verification step (e.g., confirm the archived directory exists and the source is gone) to strengthen the workflow feedback loop.

Provide a concrete command for generating the current date (e.g., date +%Y-%m-%d) instead of the bare YYYY-MM-DD placeholder.

Trim the Guardrails section of items that restate step instructions (e.g. 'Always prompt for change selection if not provided') to reduce redundancy.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is direct and assumes Claude's competence (no explanations of JSON or archiving), with only minor redundancy such as the Guardrails section restating step content like 'Always prompt for change selection if not provided'.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready commands (openspec list --json, openspec status --change, mkdir -p, mv) and specific JSON fields to parse, with a minor gap around generating the current date for the archive name.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 6-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (artifact/task completion checks with AskUserQuestion confirmation, and a pre-move target-exists guard) for a destructive-ish directory move; not a 5 because error recovery is 'fail and suggest' rather than a validate-fix-retry loop with post-archive verification.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Self-contained skill with no bundle files needed and a clean section structure (Input, Steps, Output On Success, Guardrails); slightly above the simple-skill line and well-organized, though not a 5 because some inline content (e.g. the sync subagent prompt and output template) is dense.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with a reasonable trigger phrase and a distinct niche. It is held back by a single repeated action verb and limited trigger-term variation rather than comprehensive coverage.

Suggestions

List the concrete actions performed (e.g., check artifact/task completion, sync delta specs, move the change to a dated archive folder) instead of restating 'archive/finalize'.

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms users might say, such as 'close out', 'wrap up', or 'archive a completed change' alongside 'finalize and archive'.

Make the 'when' clause more specific, e.g. 'Use when implementation of a change is complete and the user wants to archive it (and optionally sync specs)'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('completed change in the experimental workflow') and the core action ('archive', 'finalize and archive') but only lists a single action rather than several concrete actions, so it is not comprehensive enough for a 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow) and 'when' (Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete); the 'when' is clear but could be more specific about the triggering context.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains a natural trigger ('Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete') but relies on a single phrasing and lacks common synonyms or variations a user might actually say.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (archiving completed changes in the experimental workflow) with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk, with only minor possible overlap with generic archive/finalize skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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: rpamis/comet
Path: eval/local/skills/benchmarks/dependency/openspec/openspec-archive-change/SKILL.md
Commit: f329b48

Reviewed: about 21 hours 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.