CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

refinement-loop

Iterative refinement through multiple passes. Use when the user asks to 'meditate on', 'distill', 'refine', or 'iterate on' something, or proactively when a problem benefits from multiple passes rather than a single attempt.

Quality

77%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/refinement-loop/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a well-sequenced, actionable process with an explicit validation checklist before stopping and appropriate self-contained structure for a simple skill. Its main weakness is redundancy — the Principles section restates the exhaustive checklist — plus a slightly vague stopping criterion and no worked example of one iteration.

Suggestions

Trim or merge the Principles section: 'No "good enough"', 'Consider the unconsidered', and 'Earn the stop' duplicate the exhaustive checklist and could be cut or folded into it.

Make the stopping criterion concrete, e.g. 'stop only after two consecutive full checklist passes with no findings' instead of 'extensively multiple times'.

Add a brief worked example of one iteration (before → critique → after) to anchor what a meaningful improvement looks like.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient, but the Principles section substantially duplicates the exhaustive checklist — 'No "good enough"', 'Consider the unconsidered', and 'Earn the stop' restate the checklist items and the 'Only stop when…' paragraph. This is more than the 'minor instances' of the level-4 anchor, matching level 3's 'could be tightened'.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete guidance throughout: exact file conventions ('playground/{goal}-{subject}-0.md', '{N+1}.md'), naming examples ('gist-nullables', 'simplify-api'), specific user questions, and a 4-item pre-stop checklist. Not level 5 because there is no worked example of a single iteration and the stopping criterion 'gone through this checklist extensively multiple times' is fuzzy.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The process is clearly sequenced (Clarify → Capture → Iterate → Present) with an explicit validation gate before stopping (the exhaustive checklist) and a built-in feedback loop (write → re-read → critique → improve). It writes only to a scratch playground, so the destructive/batch cap does not apply; the explicit checklist and stop condition match the level-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a ~50-line single-purpose skill with no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent) and no content that warrants external files; the Setup/Process/Principles sections are well-organized. Per the simple-skill guideline, well-organized sections alone merit level 5 here.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

65%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description has a strong, explicit trigger clause with natural user phrasing and a clear proactive condition, but the capability statement is abstract — it says the skill refines iteratively without naming any concrete action it performs. Adding one or two specific actions and a few more trigger synonyms would round it out.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 concrete actions to the capability sentence, e.g. 'Write successive versions of a document or design to versioned files, critique each pass, and present the refined result.'

Include additional natural trigger synonyms such as 'polish', 'revise', or 'improve' in the 'Use when' clause to broaden keyword coverage.

State the mechanism (file-based iteration in a playground directory) so the 'what' is as explicit as the 'when'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Iterative refinement through multiple passes') but lists no concrete actions — it never mentions writing versioned files, critiquing each pass, or presenting the final result. This matches the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' rather than level 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: 'Iterative refinement through multiple passes' answers what, and an explicit 'Use when the user asks to…' clause with concrete trigger phrases answers when. Not level 5 because the 'what' is a single abstract phrase lacking the concrete action list shown in the level-5 anchor.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The quoted phrases "'meditate on', 'distill', 'refine', or 'iterate on'" plus the proactive condition are natural terms users would say. Not level 5 because common variations such as 'polish', 'revise', or 'improve this' are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The distinctive trigger verbs ('meditate on', 'distill') carve a clear niche, but 'refine'/'iterate on' carry minor overlap risk with general editing or code-simplification skills, matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the minimal-conflict level 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

saski/arnesto

Path

.agents/skills/refinement-loop/SKILL.md

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.