agent-consensus-coordinator

Agent skill for consensus-coordinator - invoke with $agent-consensus-coordinator

7.38x

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

7.38x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

35%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is an over-long, monolithic document that pads actionable code examples with textbook concept listings a competent model already knows. The code is structurally concrete but not reliably executable, and the workflows lack validation checkpoints.

Suggestions

Cut the encyclopedic sections (Advanced Consensus Algorithms, Performance Optimization, Fault Tolerance Mechanisms) that restate concepts Claude already knows, or move them into a reference file linked one level deep.

Make code examples executable: define or stub the helper methods, use correct MCP tool invocation rather than treating tools as global JS functions, and fix the '.$consensus-network' typo.

Add validation/feedback-loop checkpoints to the Example Workflows (e.g. verify consensus convergence, re-run on Byzantine-node detection) and give steps concrete commands instead of abstract verbs.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~330-line body is padded with encyclopedic bullet lists of textbook concepts Claude already knows (pBFT phases, PoS slashing, sharding, CAP theorem, split-brain) plus a 'You are a Consensus Coordinator Agent...' role preamble and a stray duplicate frontmatter block, matching the verbose/padded level-1 anchor.	1 / 3
Actionability	Concrete JavaScript examples with real MCP tool names and parameters are present, but they are not copy-paste executable: they call undefined helper methods (this.extractDecision, this.createVotingMatrix), invoke MCP tools as global JS identifiers, contain a require typo ('.$consensus-network'), and include a nonsensical 'blockchain consensus via neural_train' example.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The Example Workflows provide numbered sequences but the steps are abstract ('Design consensus network topology', 'Select appropriate consensus protocol') with no commands, validation checkpoints, or feedback loops for these distributed/risky operations, capping clarity at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Content is organized into labeled sections but is a single monolithic file with no bundle references, and encyclopedic material (advanced algorithms, performance optimization, fault tolerance) that should live in separate reference files is inlined in SKILL.md.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Description

22%

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 frontmatter description is templated boilerplate that names the skill's niche but states no concrete capabilities and provides no natural 'Use when...' trigger guidance. It relies almost entirely on the skill name to distinguish itself.

Suggestions

Replace the boilerplate with concrete third-person actions, e.g. 'Designs and implements Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus protocols, weighted voting, and multi-agent coordination using sublinear solvers.'

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when coordinating agreement across distributed agents, building BFT or voting protocols, or optimizing consensus convergence.'

Drop the 'invoke with $agent-consensus-coordinator' syntax from the description; it is invocation metadata, not a natural user trigger.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description 'Agent skill for consensus-coordinator' names a domain but lists no concrete actions (no verbs like designs, implements, or coordinates), matching the 'vague or no actions' anchor rather than the action-naming level 2.	1 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is only a weak topic label and the 'when' is entirely absent — 'invoke with $agent-consensus-coordinator' is an invocation instruction, not a 'Use when...' trigger, so both halves are weak per the level-1 anchor.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It contains relevant domain words a user might say ('consensus', 'coordinator', 'agent') but presents them as the skill's proper name plus the '$agent-consensus-coordinator' invocation syntax, missing common natural variations like voting, Byzantine, or distributed agreement.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It names a specific niche (consensus coordination) and a distinct command trigger, making outright conflict unlikely, but the description itself is templated boilerplate ('Agent skill for X - invoke with $X') that does not differentiate beyond the skill name.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 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: ruvnet/claude-flow
Commit: 03d4f84

Reviewed: 2 days 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.