agent-byzantine-coordinator
Agent skill for byzantine-coordinator - invoke with $agent-byzantine-coordinator
34
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
94%
1.06xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-byzantine-coordinator/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%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 an extremely weak description that provides essentially no useful information beyond the skill's name and invocation command. It fails on every dimension: no concrete actions, no trigger terms, no 'what' or 'when' guidance, and no distinguishing characteristics. It is functionally equivalent to the 'bad overall examples' in the rubric.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what byzantine-coordinator actually does (e.g., 'Coordinates distributed consensus across multiple agents, handles fault-tolerant decision-making, manages replicated state').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms that describe scenarios where this skill should be selected (e.g., 'Use when the user needs distributed coordination, fault-tolerant consensus, or multi-agent agreement protocols').
Replace the generic 'Agent skill for' phrasing with a third-person description of specific capabilities, removing the invocation instruction which belongs in usage documentation rather than the description field.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for byzantine-coordinator' is entirely abstract with no indication of what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. The description only states the invocation command, providing no functional or contextual information. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only keyword is 'byzantine-coordinator', which is technical jargon that no user would naturally say. There are no natural language trigger terms that a user might use when needing this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'byzantine-coordinator' is a unique name, the description is so vague that Claude cannot determine when to select it versus any other skill. The lack of any functional description makes it impossible to distinguish from other agent skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads as a high-level design document or feature wishlist rather than actionable instructions for Claude. It contains no executable code, no concrete workflows, no validation steps, and no examples. Every section describes what should be done in abstract terms without providing any guidance on how to actually accomplish it.
Suggestions
Replace abstract descriptions with concrete, executable code examples showing how to implement PBFT consensus steps (pre-prepare, prepare, commit phases) with actual message structures and validation logic.
Add a clear numbered workflow with explicit validation checkpoints for the consensus protocol, including error recovery steps for when Byzantine behavior is detected.
Remove explanatory text about what Byzantine fault tolerance is and instead provide specific commands, data structures, and decision trees that Claude can directly use.
Either add references to detailed implementation files (e.g., PBFT_PROTOCOL.md, ATTACK_PATTERNS.md) or include the concrete implementation details inline if the skill is meant to be self-contained.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is verbose and describes concepts at a high level without adding anything Claude doesn't already know. Phrases like 'ensuring system integrity and reliability in the presence of malicious actors' and bullet points explaining what PBFT is are unnecessary padding. No concrete implementation details justify the token usage. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides zero concrete code, commands, or executable guidance. Every bullet point is an abstract description ('Deploy PBFT three-phase protocol', 'Implement threshold signature schemes') with no specifics on how to actually do any of it. There are no examples, no code snippets, and no copy-paste ready instructions. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Despite describing a multi-step consensus protocol (three-phase PBFT), there is no clear sequencing of steps, no validation checkpoints, and no error recovery workflow. The content lists responsibilities without defining any actual process flow. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic list of abstract bullet points with no references to external files, no navigation structure, and no separation between overview and detailed content. There's no progressive disclosure strategy at all. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 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
- ruvnet/claude-flow
- Commit
f547cec
- 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.