agent-queen-coordinator

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

2.93x

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

97%

2.93x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-queen-coordinator/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 description is essentially a placeholder that provides no functional information about the skill's purpose, capabilities, or appropriate usage context. It only states the invocation command, which is useless for skill selection. This is among the weakest possible descriptions and would be indistinguishable from any other skill in a multi-skill environment.

Suggestions

Add a clear statement of what the skill does with specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Coordinates parallel sub-agent tasks for large-scale code refactoring across multiple files').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms that describe the situations and user requests where this skill should be selected.

Replace the internal name 'queen-coordinator' with domain-specific language that describes the skill's actual function, so Claude can match it to relevant user queries.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for queen-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 only information is the invocation command, which does not serve as a functional description.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	No natural keywords a user would say are present. 'queen-coordinator' is an internal/technical name that provides no semantic clues about the skill's domain or purpose.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so vague that it provides no basis for distinguishing it from any other skill. Without knowing what it does, there's no way to avoid conflicts or ensure correct selection.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Implementation

14%

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

This skill is heavily over-themed with a 'queen bee' metaphor that adds significant verbosity without improving clarity or actionability. While it contains some concrete MCP tool call examples, most content is either placeholder data, abstract bullet points, or roleplay framing. The skill lacks a clear workflow, validation steps, and any progressive disclosure structure.

Suggestions

Strip the roleplay/metaphorical language (sovereign, royal decrees, coup prevention, morale) and replace with direct, functional descriptions of what the coordinator agent actually does.

Define a clear sequential workflow: e.g., 1) Initialize coordination state, 2) Discover active agents, 3) Assign tasks, 4) Monitor progress, 5) Handle failures — with explicit validation at each step.

Replace placeholder/static JSON values (coherence_score: 0.95, morale: 'high') with dynamic logic or at minimum explain how these values should be computed or updated based on actual swarm state.

Move detailed delegation patterns and governance modes to a separate reference file, keeping SKILL.md focused on the core coordination workflow and essential tool calls.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose with extensive roleplay framing ('sovereign intelligence', 'royal decrees', 'coup prevention'). Much of the content is thematic fluff that adds no actionable value. The metaphorical language (morale, rebellious agents, hive loyalty) wastes tokens on concepts Claude doesn't need explained in this way.	1 / 3
Actionability	The code blocks show concrete MCP tool calls with specific JSON structures, which is somewhat actionable. However, many are just storing static/placeholder data (coherence_score: 0.95, morale: 'high') rather than showing dynamic logic. Sections like 'Succession Planning' and 'Emergency Protocols' are bullet-point lists with no executable guidance.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no clear sequential workflow with validation checkpoints. The skill lists responsibilities and code snippets but never defines when or how to execute them in sequence. The 'Command Protocols' section has a 3-step pattern but it's abstract (e.g., 'Issue directive → Monitor compliance → Evaluate results') with no concrete validation or error recovery steps.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files and no clear hierarchy of information. Everything is inline at the same level of detail, mixing high-level governance philosophy with specific code snippets. No bundle files exist to support progressive disclosure.	1 / 3
	Total	5 / 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: 9d4a9ea

Reviewed: 6 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.