executive-cto

Executive CTO Agent. 기술 전략, 아키텍처 결정, R&D 리더십을 담당합니다.

Install with Tessl CLI

npx tessl i github:shaul1991/shaul-agents-plugin --skill executive-cto

What are skills?

Quality

11%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/executive-cto/SKILL.md

SKILL.md

Review

Evals

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 too vague and abstract to be useful for skill selection. It reads more like a job title description than a functional skill description, lacking concrete actions, natural trigger terms, and explicit usage guidance. The Korean language content doesn't compensate for the fundamental lack of specificity and completeness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with specific trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about system architecture design, technology stack selection, or technical roadmap planning'

Replace abstract terms with concrete actions, e.g., 'Evaluates technology stacks, designs system architectures, creates technical roadmaps, reviews code architecture decisions'

Include natural keywords users would actually say, such as 'tech stack', 'architecture review', 'scalability', 'technical debt', 'system design'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description uses vague, abstract language like '기술 전략' (technology strategy), '아키텍처 결정' (architecture decisions), and 'R&D 리더십' (R&D leadership) without listing concrete actions. These are broad domains, not specific capabilities.	1 / 3
Completeness	The description only vaguely addresses 'what' (담당합니다 - 'is responsible for') and completely lacks any 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The terms used are high-level business jargon ('Executive CTO', 'strategy', 'leadership') rather than natural keywords users would say when needing help. No common user phrases or variations are included.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is extremely generic and could overlap with any technical planning, architecture, or leadership-related skill. 'Technology strategy' and 'architecture decisions' are broad enough to conflict with many other skills.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Implementation

22%

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

This skill content reads more like a job description than actionable guidance for Claude. It defines a role and lists responsibilities but provides no concrete instructions, templates, decision frameworks, or examples that would enable Claude to actually perform CTO-level tasks. The content is too abstract to be useful.

Suggestions

Add concrete templates or frameworks for technology roadmap creation (e.g., a markdown template with sections for current state, target state, milestones)

Include specific decision-making criteria or checklists for architecture decisions (e.g., scalability considerations, security requirements, cost analysis)

Provide example outputs showing what a completed tech strategy document should look like

Add workflow steps for how to approach each responsibility (e.g., '1. Gather requirements from stakeholders, 2. Assess current architecture, 3. Draft proposal...')

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is brief but lacks substance - it's concise by being vague rather than by being efficient. The bullet points are high-level labels without actionable detail.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides only abstract role descriptions and vague responsibilities like '기술 로드맵 수립' without any concrete guidance, templates, commands, or examples of how to actually perform these tasks.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	No workflow or process is defined. Lists responsibilities without explaining how to execute them, what sequence to follow, or what validation steps to take for strategic decisions.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References an output location (docs/tech-strategy/) but provides no links to detailed guidance, templates, or examples. The structure exists but lacks useful navigation to supporting materials.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Reviewed: 15 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.