recipe-plan

Create work plan from design document and obtain plan approval

Quality

69%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/recipe-plan/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

88%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 well-structured, highly actionable orchestrator recipe with explicit validation gates and feedback loops for an approval-bearing batch operation. It is token-efficient with only minor redundancy between framing sections and the numbered steps, and its references are clearly signaled even though no local bundle files are present.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense and directive with no padded explanations of concepts Claude already knows, though the 'Orchestrator Definition' and 'Execution Protocol' sections overlap somewhat with the numbered steps; fits 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete copy-paste-ready guidance throughout — exact subagent_types, field names (designDoc, prd, testSkeletons), a verbatim document-reviewer prompt, file paths (docs/plans/[plan-name].md), and a completion-block template; matches 'fully executable; copy-paste ready'.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Five clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation — the Step 4 Review Resolution Gate with correction re-review, escalation, and convergence transitions plus the Step 5 user-change feedback loop (re-invoke work-planner, re-run Step 4) provide explicit checkpoints and error-recovery loops for this batch/approval operation.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No local bundle files exist; the body is well-sectioned (Orchestrator Definition, Scope Boundaries, Execution Process, Response at Completion) and its external references (review-resolution.md, llm-friendly-context, subagents-orchestration-guide) are clearly signaled, though some detail such as the verbatim reviewer prompt is inlined rather than split out.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

50%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 is concrete and third-person but terse, with no 'Use when...' trigger guidance and only task-internal jargon as keywords, which limits its trigger-term quality and completeness. It is distinguishable within a dev-workflows ecosystem but not strongly differentiated against generic planning skills.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause stating the natural trigger (e.g., 'Use when creating a work plan from an approved design document for the planning phase').

Include natural user-facing trigger terms and synonyms (e.g., 'planning phase', 'implementation plan', 'break the design doc into tasks') rather than only internal jargon.

List a couple more concrete actions (e.g., generate test skeletons, route the plan through review) to widen coverage and raise distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Quotes 'Create work plan from design document and obtain plan approval' — names the domain (design document → work plan) with two concrete actions (create, obtain approval), matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor; not a 4 because it does not list several specific actions with broader coverage.	3 / 5
Completeness	It has a clear 'what' (create work plan, obtain approval) but no 'when'/Use-when trigger clause, and the rubric caps completeness at 3 for a missing explicit trigger guidance; not a 4 because 'when' is entirely absent.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Keywords 'work plan', 'design document', 'plan approval' are task-internal jargon rather than natural user phrasings, with no synonyms or common variations; fits 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Work plan from design document and plan approval' is a moderately specific niche but could overlap with generic planning skills and lacks distinct natural triggers, matching 'somewhat specific but could still overlap'.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: shinpr/claude-code-workflows
Path: skills/recipe-plan/SKILL.md
Commit: 83cf695

Reviewed: about 22 hours 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.