CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

concise-planning

Use when a user asks for a plan for a coding task, to generate a clear, actionable, and atomic checklist.

62

Quality

78%

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/concise-planning/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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.

A tight, well-structured body that assumes Claude's intelligence and gives a directly usable template with clear sequencing and a built-in validation requirement. The only notable gaps are the absence of a worked example and minor redundancy in the 'When to Use' and 'Limitations' sections.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — the workflow, template, and guidelines are all instruction rather than explanation. It falls short of 5 only because the 'When to Use' section duplicates the frontmatter description and the 'Limitations' section carries generic boilerplate ('Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation...') that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

As an instruction-only skill it provides a copy-paste-ready markdown plan template, an explicit output structure (Approach, Scope In/Out, Action Items, Validation, Open Questions max 3), and concrete guidelines (verb-first, atomic, name specific files). It is not a 5 because there is no worked example of a filled-in plan showing what a good result looks like.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The three-step sequence (Scan Context → Minimal Interaction → Generate Plan) is clearly ordered with a validation requirement ('Validation: At least one item for testing') built into the output. It misses 5 because there is no feedback or error-recovery loop, though nothing here is destructive or batch, so no cap applies.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple single-purpose skill with no bundle files; everything — workflow, template, guidelines — is appropriately inline, nothing clearly belongs in a separate file, and the well-labeled sections (Goal, Workflow, Plan Template, Checklist Guidelines, When to Use, Limitations) make navigation trivial, which per the simple-skill guidance earns full marks.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

A compact description with an explicit 'Use when...' trigger in third-person voice, natural keywords, and a concrete output artifact. Its main weakness is specificity: it communicates a single action (generate an atomic checklist) padded with adjectives rather than enumerating what the skill actually does (scan context, ask at most 1-2 questions, produce scope and validation sections).

Suggestions

Replace the adjectives 'clear, actionable' with additional concrete capabilities, e.g. 'Scans the codebase for constraints, asks at most 1-2 clarifying questions, and produces a plan with scope, ordered action items, and validation steps.'

Add natural trigger synonyms users might say, such as 'break down a coding task', 'steps', or 'task checklist', to broaden keyword coverage.

State the output contents explicitly (scope In/Out, verb-first action items, validation item) so the 'what' is as concrete as the 'when'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("a plan for a coding task") and one concrete action ("generate a clear, actionable, and atomic checklist"), but "clear, actionable" are adjectives rather than additional capabilities, so coverage is not comprehensive — matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor rather than the 'several specific actions' anchor above.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both halves are explicitly present: 'when' via "Use when a user asks for a plan for a coding task" and 'what' via "to generate a clear, actionable, and atomic checklist". It falls short of 5 because the 'what' is thin — it never says the output includes scope boundaries, ordered action items, or validation steps, so the capability description could be more specific.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"plan", "coding task", and "checklist" are natural phrases a user would actually say when needing this skill, but common synonyms like "break down the task", "steps", or "roadmap" are missing, matching 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' rather than comprehensive coverage at 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Coding task plan" narrowed to an "atomic checklist" carves a mostly distinct niche, but there is minor overlap risk with closely related skills (general task breakdown, TODO-list generation, or plan-mode skills), matching 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' better than the 3 anchor's 'could still overlap with similar skills'.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Path

skills/concise-planning/SKILL.md

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.