employer-brand

When the user needs to create or improve content that shapes how candidates and the public perceive the company as a place to work.

Quality

41%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/employer-brand/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

64%

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-crafted employer brand skill with strong actionability — the frameworks are concrete, the examples are realistic and copy-paste ready, and the guidance is specific rather than abstract. Its main weaknesses are length (several frameworks could be extracted into separate reference files for better progressive disclosure) and some verbosity in sections where Claude's existing knowledge could be leveraged more. The workflow is solid but could benefit from stronger user-validation checkpoints given the reputational stakes of employer brand content.

Suggestions

Extract the detailed frameworks (careers page structure, values documentation, engineering blog, day-in-the-life) into separate referenced files to improve progressive disclosure and reduce the main skill's token footprint.

Add an explicit user-confirmation checkpoint in the workflow (e.g., after step 4, 'Present all factual claims to the user for verification before finalizing') to strengthen the authenticity validation loop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is fairly comprehensive but includes some content that could be tightened. Sections like the anti-patterns list and some framework descriptions are useful but verbose — e.g., explaining why stock photos hurt trust or why superlatives are bad is something Claude already understands. The overall length (~150+ lines) is justified by the breadth of content types covered, but individual sections could be leaner.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides highly concrete, actionable guidance throughout. The VEP framework gives a clear three-layer structure with specific examples. The careers page structure provides a detailed section-by-section arc. The values documentation framework includes a complete, copy-paste-ready example with 'what this looks like' and 'what this does NOT look like.' The examples section shows realistic prompts with good output snippets.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 6-step workflow is clearly sequenced and logical, moving from discovery through drafting to review. However, for a content creation skill that involves representing a company's culture to candidates (where inauthenticity can cause real harm), the validation steps are somewhat weak — step 6 says to 'flag' aspirational claims but doesn't provide a concrete verification mechanism or feedback loop with the user to confirm factual accuracy of claims before finalizing.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill references related skills (job-description, content-strategy) which is good, but the main content is monolithic — all frameworks (VEP, careers page structure, values framework, engineering blog framework, day-in-the-life structure, anti-patterns) are inline rather than split into referenced files. For a skill this long covering 5+ distinct content types, the frameworks and detailed structures for each content type would benefit from being in separate referenced documents.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

17%

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 to be effective for skill selection. It fails to name specific deliverables or actions, lacks natural trigger keywords users would employ, and is not distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with other content-related skills. The only positive is that it attempts a 'when' framing, but the content within that framing is too abstract.

Suggestions

Add specific concrete actions such as 'Write job descriptions, create careers page copy, develop employee value propositions (EVPs), draft employer brand messaging, and produce recruitment marketing content.'

Include natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'employer branding, job posting, careers page, talent attraction, recruitment marketing, company culture content, EVP.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with distinct triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about employer branding, writing job descriptions, careers page content, or attracting talent through company culture messaging.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description uses vague language like 'create or improve content' and 'shapes how candidates and the public perceive the company.' No concrete actions are listed—there's no mention of specific deliverables like job postings, career pages, employer brand guidelines, social media content, or EVP statements.	1 / 3
Completeness	The description does address 'when' (when the user needs to create or improve employer branding content) but the 'what' is extremely vague—it doesn't specify what kinds of content or what actions the skill performs. The 'when' clause exists but is too abstract to serve as an effective trigger.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The description lacks natural keywords a user would say. Terms like 'employer branding,' 'job description,' 'careers page,' 'EVP,' 'talent attraction,' or 'recruitment marketing' are absent. A user asking for help with employer branding content would not naturally use the phrasing in this description.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so generic ('create or improve content') that it could easily conflict with general content writing, marketing, HR, or communications skills. Nothing distinctly identifies this as employer branding versus any other content creation task.	1 / 3
	Total	5 / 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: shawnpang/startup-founder-skills
Commit: 4ad31b4

Reviewed: 3 months 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.