brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
68
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
32%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 suffers from being overly broad and vague. While it attempts to establish when to use the skill, the triggers are so generic ('any creative work', 'creating features') that it would conflict with most development-related skills. The actual capabilities ('explores user intent, requirements and design') are abstract and don't convey concrete actions.
Suggestions
Replace vague capability statement with specific actions (e.g., 'Conducts requirements gathering sessions, creates user stories, drafts technical specifications, identifies edge cases')
Narrow the trigger scope to specific scenarios rather than 'any creative work' (e.g., 'Use when starting a new feature, when requirements are unclear, or when the user asks for help planning implementation')
Add distinctive terminology that separates this from general coding skills (e.g., 'requirements analysis', 'design exploration', 'specification drafting')
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Uses vague, abstract language like 'creative work', 'features', 'components', 'functionality' without describing concrete actions. 'Explores user intent, requirements and design' is generic and doesn't specify what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Has a 'when' clause ('before any creative work - creating features, building components...') but the 'what' is weak ('Explores user intent, requirements and design'). The when clause is overly broad rather than providing explicit, useful triggers. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant terms like 'features', 'building components', 'adding functionality', 'modifying behavior' that users might say, but these are very broad and could apply to almost any development task. Missing specific natural language triggers. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Extremely generic scope - 'creative work', 'features', 'components', 'functionality', 'modifying behavior' would conflict with virtually any development or coding skill. No clear niche or distinct triggers. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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 well-structured skill with excellent workflow clarity and actionability. The explicit approval gates and clear sequencing make it safe for creative work. However, it could be more concise by reducing redundancy in the HARD-GATE sections and potentially moving the dot diagram to a separate reference file.
Suggestions
Consolidate the two HARD-GATE sections into a single, prominent gate at the top to reduce redundancy
Consider moving the dot diagram to a separate reference file or removing it entirely since the checklist already conveys the workflow clearly
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy - the HARD-GATE sections repeat similar information, and the anti-pattern section restates what's already clear from the gates. The dot diagram, while useful, adds significant tokens for information already conveyed in the checklist. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance throughout: specific bash commands for worktree detection, exact file paths for design docs (docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md), clear branch naming conventions, and explicit skill invocations (kit:git-worktrees, kit:team-orchestration, kit:writing-plans). | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-step workflow with explicit checkpoints: numbered checklist, clear decision points (worktree detection), explicit STOP gates requiring user approval before proceeding, and a visual flowchart. The re-entry path is clearly distinguished from fresh start. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections, but everything is inline in a single file. References to other skills (kit:git-worktrees, kit:team-orchestration, kit:writing-plans) are mentioned but the skill itself is somewhat long and could benefit from splitting detailed scout instructions or the dot diagram into separate references. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.