agent-orchestrator-task

Agent skill for orchestrator-task - invoke with $agent-orchestrator-task

1.32x

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

82%

1.32x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-orchestrator-task/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 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 more like an internal label than a functional description.

Suggestions

Replace the entire description with concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Breaks down complex tasks into subtasks, delegates work to specialized agents, and aggregates results.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms describing the scenarios where this skill should be selected, e.g., 'Use when the user requests multi-step workflows, task decomposition, or coordination across multiple agents.'

Remove the invocation syntax ('invoke with $agent-orchestrator-task') from the description, as it does not help Claude decide when to select the skill, and replace it with domain-specific keywords users would naturally use.

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. The description only states it's an 'agent skill' and how to invoke it, with no explanation of purpose or trigger conditions.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The only terms present are 'orchestrator-task' and '$agent-orchestrator-task', which are internal/technical jargon. No natural user-facing keywords are included that a user would actually say.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so generic ('agent skill for orchestrator-task') that it provides no distinguishing characteristics. It could conflict with any orchestration or task-management skill.	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 task orchestration rather than an actionable skill file. It explains abstract concepts Claude already understands (task decomposition, dependency management, parallelization) without providing any concrete tools, commands, code, or specific procedures. The content would need a fundamental rewrite to be useful as an operational skill.

Suggestions

Replace abstract descriptions with concrete, executable examples showing how to actually invoke sub-agents, use TodoWrite for tracking, and use memory_store/memory_search for state management.

Add specific workflow steps with validation checkpoints, e.g., 'After decomposition, verify all dependencies are resolvable before proceeding to execution.'

Remove sections that explain concepts Claude already knows (what task decomposition is, what dependency graphs are, common pitfalls like 'poor dependency management') and replace with specific protocols and decision criteria.

Extract detailed patterns (Feature Development, Bug Fix, Refactoring) into a separate reference file and keep SKILL.md as a concise operational guide with one clear example workflow.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is highly verbose, explaining general project management and orchestration concepts that Claude already understands. Sections like 'Core Functionality', 'Best Practices', and 'Common Pitfalls' describe abstract ideas (dependency graphs, bottleneck identification, critical path optimization) without providing any concrete, novel information Claude wouldn't already know.	1 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides no executable code, no concrete commands, and no specific tool invocations. The 'Task Patterns' are abstract outlines (e.g., 'Requirements Analysis (Sequential)') with no actual implementation details. Usage examples are just natural language descriptions of what to ask, not actionable instructions for how to perform orchestration.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The task patterns do provide sequenced steps with parallel/sequential annotations, which gives some workflow structure. However, there are no validation checkpoints, no error recovery steps, no feedback loops, and no concrete mechanisms for how to actually track progress or handle failures.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files for detailed content. Everything is inline with no clear navigation structure. Sections like 'Advanced Features' and 'Integration Points' could be separate references but are instead listed as shallow bullet points that add little value.	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/ruflo
Commit: 398f7c2

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.