autonomous-agents
Autonomous agents are AI systems that can independently decompose goals, plan actions, execute tools, and self-correct without constant human guidance. The challenge isn't making them capable - it's making them reliable. Every extra decision multiplies failure probability. This skill covers agent loops (ReAct, Plan-Execute), goal decomposition, reflection patterns, and production reliability. Key insight: compounding error rates kill autonomous agents. A 95% success rate per step drops to 60% b
Overall
score
37%
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill autonomous-agentsActivation
33%This description reads more like educational content about autonomous agents than a skill description for Claude. It explains concepts and challenges but fails to specify what actions Claude performs or when to invoke this skill. The truncated ending and lack of explicit trigger guidance significantly weaken its utility for skill selection.
Suggestions
Add a clear 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms like 'build an agent', 'autonomous workflow', 'agent loop', 'self-correcting AI'
Replace conceptual explanations with concrete actions Claude performs, e.g., 'Designs agent architectures, implements ReAct loops, adds error recovery patterns'
Fix the truncated description and remove educational commentary that doesn't help with skill selection
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (autonomous agents) and lists some concepts (agent loops, ReAct, Plan-Execute, goal decomposition, reflection patterns), but these are conceptual topics rather than concrete actions Claude would perform. No specific verbs describing what Claude does with this skill. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Provides conceptual 'what' (covers agent loops, patterns, reliability) but completely lacks any 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance. The description also appears truncated mid-sentence ('60% b'), making it incomplete. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant technical terms like 'autonomous agents', 'ReAct', 'Plan-Execute', 'goal decomposition', but these are jargon-heavy. Missing natural user phrases like 'build an agent', 'create autonomous workflow', or 'agent reliability'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The focus on autonomous agents and specific patterns like ReAct provides some distinctiveness, but terms like 'AI systems', 'planning', and 'reliability' could overlap with general coding or architecture skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%This skill content appears to be an incomplete draft or template. While it has good structural organization and identifies relevant concepts (ReAct, Plan-Execute, reflection patterns), it lacks any concrete implementation guidance, executable code, or complete examples. The sharp edges table is broken with placeholder text, and patterns are named without being explained.
Suggestions
Add executable code examples for at least one agent loop pattern (e.g., a complete ReAct implementation with reasoning/action/observation cycle)
Fix the sharp edges table - replace 'Issue' placeholders with actual issues and provide complete solutions instead of just headers
Include a concrete workflow with numbered steps and validation checkpoints for building a basic autonomous agent
Remove the philosophical persona framing and capabilities list in favor of actionable implementation details
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is relatively brief but includes some unnecessary philosophical framing ('You are an agent architect who has learned the hard lessons...') that doesn't add actionable value. The capabilities list is redundant with the title and patterns. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill is almost entirely abstract with no concrete code, commands, or executable examples. Pattern names are listed without implementation details. The sharp edges table has broken formatting with 'Issue' placeholders and solutions that are just headers without content. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No actual workflows are defined. ReAct, Plan-Execute, and Reflection patterns are mentioned by name only with one-line descriptions but no steps, sequences, or validation checkpoints. There's no guidance on how to actually implement any agent loop. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The document has clear section headers and references related skills at the end, but the content within sections is incomplete or broken. No links to detailed documentation for the patterns mentioned. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
63%Validation — 10 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
description_trigger_hint | Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...') | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
body_examples | No examples detected (no code fences and no 'Example' wording) | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 10 / 16 Passed | |
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.