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 label with an invocation command and provides zero useful information about the skill's purpose, capabilities, or appropriate usage context. It fails on every dimension because it neither describes what the skill does nor when it should be selected.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions describing what queen-coordinator actually does (e.g., 'Coordinates parallel sub-agents to divide and execute complex multi-step tasks').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms that describe the situations where this skill should be selected (e.g., 'Use when the user requests a complex task that benefits from parallel execution or multi-agent coordination').

Replace internal jargon ('queen-coordinator') with user-facing language that describes the skill's domain and function so Claude can match it to user requests.

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. There is no 'Use when...' clause and no description of functionality.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	No natural keywords a user would say are present. 'queen-coordinator' is internal jargon, and 'invoke with $agent-queen-coordinator' is a technical invocation instruction, not a trigger term.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so vague that it provides no distinguishing characteristics. Without knowing what the skill does, it could conflict with anything or nothing—Claude has no basis for 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 'queen/hive/royal' metaphors that consume tokens without adding actionable guidance. While it demonstrates the correct MCP tool call syntax, the actual coordination logic is shallow—mostly storing static JSON blobs. Critical sections like emergency protocols, governance modes, and succession planning are vague bullet lists with no concrete implementation.

Suggestions

Remove all thematic roleplay language ('sovereign', 'royal decrees', 'coup prevention', 'morale', 'rebellious') and replace with direct, functional descriptions of coordination tasks.

Add concrete multi-step workflows with validation: e.g., how to detect an unresponsive agent, what specific checks to run, and what recovery actions to take with explicit tool calls.

Replace static placeholder JSON in code examples with dynamic patterns showing how to read current state, make decisions based on it, and update accordingly (read → decide → write loops).

Extract detailed delegation patterns and emergency protocols into separate referenced files, or remove the bullet-list placeholders entirely if they have no concrete implementation.

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 code blocks are repetitive store operations with slight variations, and concepts like 'morale: high' and 'rebellious: []' are decorative rather than functional.	1 / 3
Actionability	The code blocks show concrete MCP tool calls with specific JSON structures, which is somewhat actionable. However, many sections are vague bullet lists ('Byzantine fault tolerance', 'Coup prevention mechanisms') with no concrete implementation, and the code examples store static placeholder data rather than demonstrating dynamic logic.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no clear multi-step workflow with validation checkpoints. The 'Command Protocols' section lists abstract sequences (Issue directive → Monitor compliance → Evaluate results) without concrete steps. There are no feedback loops, error handling, or verification steps for any of the coordination operations described.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content is inline regardless of complexity, and sections like 'Emergency Protocols' are just unexplained bullet lists that either need elaboration in separate files or shouldn't be listed at all.	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: 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.