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 all dimensions: it names no concrete actions, includes no natural trigger terms, lacks both 'what' and 'when' guidance, and is too generic to be distinguishable from other skills. It reads more like a label than a description.

Suggestions

Describe what the planner actually does with specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Creates step-by-step execution plans for complex multi-step tasks, breaks down goals into subtasks, and tracks progress').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user needs to break down a complex task, create a project plan, organize steps, or coordinate multiple subtasks').

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 many tokens on generic planning advice and principles that Claude already understands (task decomposition, risk assessment, best practices like 'specific and actionable'). The MCP tool integration and YAML output format provide some concrete value, but the bulk of the content is abstract guidance rather than actionable instructions. The monolithic structure with no external references compounds the token waste.

Suggestions

Cut the 'Core Responsibilities', 'Best Practices', and 'Collaboration Guidelines' sections entirely — these are generic concepts Claude already knows. Focus on the specific output format and MCP tool calls.

Add explicit validation checkpoints: e.g., after generating a plan, verify all dependencies are satisfiable and no circular dependencies exist before proceeding to execution.

Split MCP tool examples and the YAML output schema into separate referenced files (e.g., [MCP_TOOLS.md](MCP_TOOLS.md), [PLAN_SCHEMA.md](PLAN_SCHEMA.md)) to reduce the main file to a concise overview.

Replace the abstract 5-step 'Planning Process' with a concrete example: show a real input request and the exact plan output it should produce, demonstrating the workflow end-to-end.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose with extensive content Claude already knows — 'Core Responsibilities' lists generic planning concepts, 'Best Practices' section restates obvious principles like 'specific and actionable, measurable and time-bound.' The 'Collaboration Guidelines' and much of the planning process description are generic advice that wastes tokens.	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, and the JavaScript examples aren't fully contextualized for real use.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 5-step planning process provides a clear sequence, and the output format gives structure. However, there are no validation checkpoints — no step to verify the plan is feasible before execution, no feedback loop for when tasks fail or plans need revision. For an orchestration agent that coordinates destructive/batch operations, this is a significant gap.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	This is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content — from high-level philosophy to MCP tool examples to YAML schemas — is inlined in a single document. The content would benefit greatly from splitting the MCP integration, output format templates, and best practices into separate referenced files.	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/ruflo
Commit: ccb062f

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.