agent-orchestrator-task
Agent skill for orchestrator-task - invoke with $agent-orchestrator-task
34
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
82%
1.32xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-orchestrator-task/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 fails on every dimension. It provides no information about what the skill does, when it should be used, or what distinguishes it from other skills. It reads as a placeholder or auto-generated stub rather than a functional skill description.
Suggestions
Replace the entire description with concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Coordinates multi-step workflows by breaking complex tasks into subtasks and delegating them to specialized agents.'
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 requests a complex task requiring multiple steps, parallel execution, or coordination across different tools.'
Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-orchestrator-task') from the description, as it does not help Claude decide when to select the skill and wastes space that should be used for capability and trigger information.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for orchestrator-task' is entirely abstract and gives no indication of what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. There is no 'Use when...' clause and no description of functionality. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | There are no natural keywords a user would say. 'orchestrator-task' is internal jargon, and 'invoke with $agent-orchestrator-task' is a technical invocation instruction, not a trigger term. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so generic that it provides no distinguishing characteristics. 'Orchestrator-task' could mean virtually anything, making it impossible to differentiate from other skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
7%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 task orchestration rather than an actionable skill file. It describes what an orchestrator does in abstract terms but never tells Claude how to actually perform orchestration—no concrete tool usage, no executable examples, no validation steps. The content largely explains concepts Claude already understands (parallelization, dependency management, task decomposition) without adding novel, specific guidance.
Suggestions
Replace abstract descriptions with concrete, executable workflows showing exact tool calls (e.g., specific TodoWrite invocations, memory_store commands, agent dispatch patterns) that Claude should use when orchestrating tasks.
Add a concrete step-by-step workflow with validation checkpoints, e.g., '1. Decompose task using TodoWrite → 2. Verify no circular dependencies → 3. Dispatch parallel tasks → 4. Check completion status → 5. If blocked, re-plan'.
Remove sections that explain concepts Claude already knows (what task decomposition is, what parallelization means, common pitfalls like 'poor dependency management') and replace with specific decision criteria and examples.
Add at least one complete worked example showing input objective → decomposed plan → agent dispatch → result synthesis with actual tool invocations and expected outputs.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is verbose and largely describes abstract concepts Claude already understands (task decomposition, dependency management, parallelization). Most sections are conceptual descriptions rather than actionable instructions, and the content could be reduced by 70%+ without losing useful information. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides no executable code, no concrete commands, and no specific implementation details. The 'Task Patterns' are abstract outlines (e.g., 'Requirements Analysis (Sequential)') with no actual steps, tool invocations, or copy-paste-ready guidance. The 'Usage Examples' are just natural language prompts, not actionable instructions. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While task patterns list phases, they lack concrete steps, validation checkpoints, error handling, or feedback loops. There's no clear sequence of what Claude should actually do when orchestrating—no specific tool calls, no validation steps, no criteria for when to proceed or retry. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is organized into logical sections with clear headers, which provides some structure. However, it's a monolithic document with no references to external files, and much of the conceptual content (Best Practices, Advanced Features) could be separated or removed entirely. No bundle files support it. | 2 / 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/ruflo
- Commit
619b263
- 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.