sdd-explore
Explore SDD ideas before committing to a change. Trigger: orchestrator launches exploration or requirement clarification.
47
51%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./internal/assets/skills/sdd-explore/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
25%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 is too vague and relies on internal jargon ('SDD', 'orchestrator') that wouldn't help Claude or users identify when to use this skill. It lacks concrete actions and natural trigger terms, making it difficult to distinguish from other planning or brainstorming skills.
Suggestions
Define 'SDD' explicitly and list specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Brainstorms design alternatives, evaluates tradeoffs, and clarifies requirements for Software Design Documents').
Replace the internal trigger ('orchestrator launches exploration') with natural user-facing trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user asks to explore design options, brainstorm approaches, or clarify requirements before making code changes').
Add file types, keywords, or domain-specific terms users would naturally mention to improve trigger term coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description says 'Explore SDD ideas' which is vague — it doesn't specify what concrete actions are performed (e.g., brainstorming, listing options, analyzing tradeoffs). 'SDD' is an unexplained acronym and 'ideas' is abstract. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | It partially answers 'what' (explore ideas before committing to a change) and has a trigger clause, but the trigger is system-internal ('orchestrator launches exploration') rather than user-facing explicit triggers. The 'when' is present but not useful for distinguishing from user requests. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms are internal/technical jargon ('orchestrator launches exploration', 'requirement clarification', 'SDD') rather than natural keywords a user would say. Users are unlikely to say 'orchestrator launches exploration.' | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Explore ideas before committing to a change' is somewhat specific in that it targets a pre-decision exploration phase, but 'SDD' is undefined and 'exploration or requirement clarification' could overlap with many planning or analysis skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured exploration skill with clear workflow steps, a concrete output template, and good separation of concerns via shared references. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (redundant references to shared doc sections, some unnecessary explanation) and the inability to verify the referenced shared files. The actionability is strong with the explicit markdown output format and comparison table structure.
Suggestions
Consolidate the repeated references to Section B/C from sdd-phase-common.md — mention the shared doc once at the top rather than re-referencing it in multiple sections.
Trim the 'What You Receive' and 'Understand the Request' sections, which largely describe things Claude can infer from context.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some redundancy — the persistence/retrieval contract is explained multiple times with references to shared docs, and the orchestrator gate preamble adds overhead. Some sections like 'What You Receive' and 'Understand the Request' explain things Claude could infer. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides a concrete output template in markdown format, a clear comparison table structure for analyzing options, specific artifact naming conventions (e.g., `sdd/{change-name}/explore`), and explicit step-by-step instructions. The guidance is specific enough to be directly executable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit steps from loading skills through returning structured analysis. Step 5 is marked as MANDATORY with bold emphasis, and the rules section provides clear constraints. The conditional logic (named change vs standalone) is well-articulated. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references shared files (`skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md`, `skills/_shared/openspec-convention.md`) for Sections A-D, which is good progressive disclosure in principle. However, since no bundle files are provided, we cannot verify these references resolve correctly, and the repeated references to sections A/B/C/D across multiple places create navigation friction without being able to see the actual content. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- sergiodvillegas-art/gentle-ai
- Commit
3bfa934
- 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.