CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

recipe-implement

Orchestrate the complete implementation lifecycle from requirements to deployment

48

Quality

51%

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 ./skills/recipe-implement/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%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 dense, well-sequenced orchestration procedure with concrete parameters and strong validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are some cross-reference repetition and inlined procedural detail that, with bundle files, could be split into one-level-deep references.

Suggestions

Reduce repetition of the "subagents-orchestration-guide" qualifier by defining the dependency once up front and referring to it as "the guide".

Extract the 4-step Task Execution Quality Cycle and Post-Implementation Review into a local reference file (e.g. references/task-cycle.md) and link to it from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Collapse the dense conditional status-routing prose into a compact table or numbered decision list to tighten conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows and stays procedural, but repeated cross-references to "subagents-orchestration-guide" and dense conditional branching could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

It specifies concrete subagent_type values, exact field names to pass (task_file, direct_scope, diffBase, mutationEvidence), and status codes to branch on (approved, blocked, needs_revision, stub_detected), giving mostly executable guidance.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Execution Decision Flow, the 4-step Task Execution Quality Cycle with explicit status routing, [Stop] markers, the Pre-execution Checklist, and the Review Resolution feedback loop provide a clearly sequenced process with explicit validation checkpoints.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-headed, but no bundle files exist and large procedural blocks (the 4-step cycle, decision flow) are inlined; the one reference signal points to another skill's file rather than a local, clearly-signaled reference.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

33%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 states a clear purpose but is vague and generic, relying on technical jargon rather than natural user triggers. It lacks an explicit "Use when..." clause and risks overlapping with many similar development skills.

Suggestions

Replace abstract phrasing with concrete actions, e.g. "Drives a feature from requirements analysis through design, implementation, code review, and deployment commit."

Add an explicit trigger clause: "Use when the user asks to implement a feature end-to-end, run a full development lifecycle, or hand off work across specialist subagents."

Include natural user-facing keywords (build, ship, implement, review, deploy) and any relevant scope markers to distinguish it from generic coding skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Orchestrate the complete implementation lifecycle" names the domain but offers only a single generic action ("orchestrate") with a vague "requirements to deployment" arc, not a list of concrete actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is stated (orchestrating the implementation lifecycle) but there is no "Use when..." or equivalent trigger clause, so per the rubric completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like "implementation lifecycle", "requirements", and "deployment" are technical jargon; the natural phrases a user would actually say (e.g. "implement a feature", "build and ship") are missing.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Implementation lifecycle from requirements to deployment" is very broad and would overlap with many general development, build, and CI/CD skills, creating high conflict risk.

2 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
shinpr/claude-code-workflows
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.