agent-code-goal-planner
Agent skill for code-goal-planner - invoke with $agent-code-goal-planner
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:ruvnet/claude-flow --skill agent-code-goal-planner42
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 89%
↑ 2.28xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
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 description is critically deficient across all dimensions. It provides only a name and invocation command without explaining what the skill does, when to use it, or any natural trigger terms. The description would be essentially useless for Claude to select this skill appropriately from a pool of available skills.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what the skill does (e.g., 'Creates step-by-step implementation plans for coding tasks, breaks down complex features into subtasks, estimates effort').
Include an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user asks to plan a coding project, break down a feature, create a development roadmap, or needs help structuring implementation steps').
Remove the invocation syntax from the description and replace with functional content - invocation details belong elsewhere, not in the selection-critical description field.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for code-goal-planner' is abstract and vague, providing no information about what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. It only provides invocation syntax ('invoke with $agent-code-goal-planner') without any functional description or trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only terms present are 'agent', 'code', 'goal', and 'planner' which are technical jargon. No natural keywords a user would say when needing this skill are included. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is extremely generic. 'Code-goal-planner' could overlap with any coding, planning, or goal-setting skill. There are no distinct triggers to differentiate it from other skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
27%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill suffers from severe verbosity and poor organization. The same SPARC-GOAP concepts are repeated in multiple formats (prose, YAML, TypeScript, JavaScript, bash) without adding value. While it contains some actionable commands and code patterns, the sheer volume of content makes it difficult to extract practical guidance, and the lack of progressive disclosure means Claude must process 400+ lines to understand what should be a focused planning methodology.
Suggestions
Reduce content by 70-80% by eliminating redundant explanations of SPARC phases - show one canonical example format instead of four
Extract detailed examples (YAML configs, TypeScript interfaces, workflow patterns) into separate reference files and link to them from a concise overview
Consolidate the multiple workflow representations into a single, clear step-by-step process with explicit validation checkpoints
Remove conceptual explanations of planning methodologies that Claude already understands - focus only on the specific commands and patterns unique to this tool
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at 400+ lines with extensive repetition of concepts. The SPARC methodology is explained multiple times in different formats (YAML, TypeScript, JavaScript, bash). Much content explains planning concepts Claude already understands, and the same ideas are restated across multiple sections. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Contains concrete code examples and CLI commands that appear executable, but many examples are illustrative rather than copy-paste ready. The TypeScript interfaces and JavaScript classes are conceptual demonstrations rather than actual implementations Claude could use directly. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multiple workflow patterns are presented (SPARC phases, GOAP methodology, feature implementation) but they overlap and compete rather than providing a single clear sequence. Validation steps exist but are scattered across different sections without a unified process. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content is inline despite being far too long for a single skill file. No clear navigation structure - the document jumps between conceptual explanations, code examples, YAML configs, and bash commands without clear organization. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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.
- 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.