agent-planner

Agent skill for planner - invoke with $agent-planner

1.43x

Quality

13%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

92%

1.43x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-planner/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

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 virtually no useful information for skill selection. It fails on every dimension: it names no concrete actions, includes no natural trigger terms, answers neither 'what' nor 'when', and is so generic it would be indistinguishable from many other potential skills.

Suggestions

Describe specific concrete actions the planner performs (e.g., 'Creates step-by-step task breakdowns, organizes project milestones, sequences dependencies').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user asks to plan a project, break down tasks, create a roadmap, or organize work into steps').

Remove the invocation syntax ('invoke with $agent-planner') from the description and replace it with domain-specific language that distinguishes this skill from other potentially similar skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for planner' is entirely vague and does not describe what the skill actually does.	1 / 3
Completeness	Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. There is no explanation of capabilities and no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The only keyword is 'planner', which is generic and not a natural term users would say when needing planning help. The invocation syntax '$agent-planner' is technical jargon, not a user trigger term.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Planner' is extremely generic and could conflict with any skill involving planning, scheduling, project management, task organization, or similar domains. There is nothing to distinguish it.	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 is overly verbose, spending most of its token budget explaining general planning concepts that Claude already knows well (task decomposition, risk assessment, dependency mapping). The MCP tool integration section provides the most value with concrete tool calls, but it's buried under layers of abstract guidance. The skill would benefit greatly from aggressive trimming and restructuring around the specific tool calls and output format that make it actionable.

Suggestions

Cut the 'Core Responsibilities', 'Best Practices', and 'Collaboration Guidelines' sections entirely—these describe general planning knowledge Claude already has. Focus on the specific output format and MCP tool calls.

Add validation checkpoints to the planning workflow, e.g., 'After task decomposition, verify all tasks have clear inputs/outputs and no circular dependencies before proceeding to resource allocation.'

Extract the MCP tool examples and YAML output format into a separate reference file (e.g., PLANNER_REFERENCE.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with links.

Replace abstract instructions like 'Analyze the complete scope of the request' with concrete examples showing a sample input request and the expected planning output.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose with extensive explanation of planning concepts Claude already understands (task decomposition, dependency analysis, risk assessment). The 'Best Practices' and 'Core Responsibilities' sections are largely restating general knowledge. The content could be reduced by 60%+ without losing actionable information.	1 / 3
Actionability	The MCP tool integration section provides concrete code examples with specific tool calls, and the YAML output format is a useful template. However, much of the content is abstract guidance ('Analyze the complete scope of the request', 'Identify key objectives') rather than executable instructions. The JavaScript examples use a specific API but aren't fully contextualized for when/how to invoke them.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 5-step planning process is sequenced but lacks validation checkpoints or feedback loops. There's no guidance on what to do if planning fails, if dependencies can't be resolved, or how to validate that a plan is complete before execution. For an orchestration agent that coordinates destructive or complex multi-agent operations, this is a significant gap.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. Everything is inlined—the YAML output format, MCP tool examples, best practices, and collaboration guidelines could be split into separate reference documents. There's no navigation structure or signposting to help find specific sections quickly.	1 / 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: ruvnet/claude-flow
Commit: 01070ed

Reviewed: 3 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.