agent-sparc-coordinator
Agent skill for sparc-coordinator - invoke with $agent-sparc-coordinator
39
6%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.24xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-sparc-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 virtually no useful information for skill selection. It only states the skill's name and invocation command without describing any capabilities, use cases, or trigger conditions. Claude would have no basis for selecting this skill from a pool of available skills.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what sparc-coordinator actually does (e.g., 'Coordinates multi-step task decomposition, delegates subtasks to specialized agents, and synthesizes results').
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 to break down complex tasks, coordinate multiple agents, or orchestrate multi-step workflows').
Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-sparc-coordinator') from the description field, as this is operational detail rather than selection-relevant information, and replace it with functional descriptions of the skill's purpose.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description provides no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for sparc-coordinator' is entirely vague—it doesn't describe what the skill does, only names itself. There are no specific capabilities listed. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. It only provides an invocation command ('invoke with $agent-sparc-coordinator') but no explanation of purpose or trigger conditions. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only potentially relevant term is 'sparc-coordinator', which is technical jargon unlikely to be naturally used by a user. There are no natural keywords that a user would say when needing this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While the name 'sparc-coordinator' is unique, the description is so vague that Claude cannot determine when to use it versus any other skill. The lack of any functional description makes it indistinguishable in practice. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
12%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 conceptual overview of the SPARC methodology rather than an actionable skill for Claude. It is excessively verbose, explaining many concepts Claude already understands, while providing no concrete commands, executable code, or specific tool usage. The content would benefit enormously from being condensed to essential instructions with concrete, executable guidance.
Suggestions
Replace abstract descriptions with concrete, executable commands or tool invocations for each SPARC phase (e.g., specific agent spawn commands, file creation steps, validation scripts).
Cut at least 60% of the content by removing explanations of concepts Claude already knows (what TDD is, what quality gates are, what architecture means) and focus only on the specific workflow steps.
Add concrete quality gate validation criteria with specific checks (e.g., 'Run `validate_spec.sh` and confirm all required fields are present') instead of vague descriptions like 'All requirements documented'.
Split detailed sections (Integration Patterns, Best Practices, Memory Integration) into separate referenced files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with clear navigation links.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose with extensive explanation of concepts Claude already knows (what SPARC phases are, what quality gates are, what TDD is). The content is heavily padded with abstract descriptions, lists of obvious items ('Edge case identification', 'Complexity analysis'), and sections like 'Success Metrics' and 'Memory Integration' that add little actionable value. Most of this could be condensed to a fraction of its size. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill is almost entirely abstract and descriptive rather than instructive. There are no concrete commands, executable code, specific tool invocations, or copy-paste ready examples. The 'Usage Examples' section contains only vague natural language prompts. The workflow diagram uses ASCII art but provides no actual executable steps or commands to run. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The phase transitions and quality gates are listed in a clear sequence with an ASCII flow diagram, which provides some structural clarity. However, there are no concrete validation steps, no specific commands for checking quality gates, and no feedback loops for error recovery. The quality gate criteria are vague ('All requirements documented', 'Tests pass, coverage adequate'). | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files and no bundle files to support it. Everything is inlined in a single long document with many sections that could be split out (agent coordination details, integration patterns, best practices). There is no navigation structure or signposting to deeper resources. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 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
ca77f83
- 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.