process-docs
When the user needs to create SOPs, playbooks, runbooks, or other operational documentation that defines how a recurring process should be executed.
86
83%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
89%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 is a solid description with excellent trigger terms and clear 'when' guidance. Its main weakness is that it could be more specific about the concrete actions performed beyond just 'create' — e.g., structuring steps, defining roles, adding decision points. The domain focus and trigger terms are strong enough to make it highly distinguishable.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions beyond 'create', such as 'structures step-by-step procedures, defines roles and responsibilities, includes decision criteria and escalation paths' to improve specificity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (operational documentation) and lists document types (SOPs, playbooks, runbooks), but does not describe concrete actions like 'generates step-by-step procedures, defines roles and responsibilities, creates decision trees.' The actions are limited to 'create' and 'defines how a recurring process should be executed.' | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | The description explicitly answers both 'what' (create SOPs, playbooks, runbooks, operational documentation that defines how a recurring process should be executed) and 'when' (starts with 'When the user needs to create...' providing a clear trigger clause). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'SOPs', 'playbooks', 'runbooks', 'operational documentation', 'recurring process'. These are the exact terms someone would use when requesting this type of content. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description carves out a clear niche around operational/process documentation with distinct terms like SOPs, playbooks, and runbooks. This is unlikely to conflict with general writing or documentation skills due to the specificity of the document types. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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 solid, highly actionable skill with excellent concrete templates and examples that demonstrate exactly what good process documentation looks like. The workflow is clear and well-sequenced. The main weaknesses are moderate verbosity in the best practices section (some items are general writing advice Claude already knows) and the length of the document, which could benefit from splitting templates into separate referenced files.
Suggestions
Move the three templates into a separate TEMPLATES.md file and reference it from the main skill, keeping only a brief summary of each template type inline.
Trim the Frameworks & Best Practices section to only include non-obvious guidance specific to process documentation (e.g., remove explanations of imperative voice and 'one action per step' which Claude already understands).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably well-structured but includes some unnecessary explanation that Claude would already know (e.g., explaining what imperative voice means with examples, the 'bus factor' concept). The best practices section, while useful, could be tightened. Some guidance like 'Screenshots decay fast' and 'Link, don't duplicate' are general documentation wisdom Claude already possesses. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides three complete, copy-paste-ready templates with specific field placeholders, concrete examples showing real tool references (Zendesk, Stripe, PagerDuty, Slack), and detailed output excerpts. The workflow steps are specific and instructive, and the examples demonstrate exactly what good output looks like with real-world specificity. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 7-step workflow is clearly sequenced from identification through review cadence. Each step builds logically on the previous one. Steps 5 and 6 serve as validation/quality checkpoints (decision trees for ambiguity, failure modes for completeness). The workflow is well-suited to the non-destructive nature of document generation. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-organized with clear sections (When to Use, Context Required, Workflow, Templates, Best Practices, Examples), but the document is quite long (~150 lines of substantive content) with three full templates inline. The templates and extensive best practices section could be split into referenced files. The 'Related Skills' section shows good cross-referencing but the main document itself could benefit from more aggressive splitting. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%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
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.