conductor-new-track

Create a new track with specification and phased implementation plan

Quality

56%

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/conductor-new-track/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

63%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 thorough, well-sequenced track-creation workflow with concrete templates and real error handling, scoring well on actionability and workflow clarity. It is held back by generic boilerplate that hurts conciseness and a dangling reference to a non-existent resources file that weakens progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Remove or replace the generic "Instructions" boilerplate ("Clarify goals...", "Apply relevant best practices...") and the vague "Use this skill when" / "Do not use this skill when" pairs with skill-specific guidance.

Fix the dangling reference: either create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` or remove the line pointing to it.

Provide the actual directory-creation command (e.g. `mkdir -p conductor/tracks/{trackId}`) instead of only a tree diagram to push actionability toward fully executable.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The template blocks (spec.md, plan.md, metadata.json, index.md) are the skill's actual deliverables and earn their place, but generic boilerplate sections like "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs" and the vague "Use this skill when" / "Do not use this skill when" pairs could be trimmed. Not a 4 because the boilerplate padding is noticeable rather than minor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete file paths, complete copy-paste-ready templates per track type, a track ID format, and metadata.json structure give mostly executable guidance. Not a 5 because directory creation is shown as a tree diagram rather than an actual command, and templates rely on placeholders Claude must fill.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear sequence runs from pre-flight checks through classification, spec gathering, user review, plan generation, user review, and track creation, with validation checkpoints (pre-flight, two user reviews) and an error-handling section that cleans up partial tracks. Not a 5 because validation is largely user-confirmation based rather than automated verification.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers organize the content, but everything is inlined in one ~430-line file and the single external reference ("open `resources/implementation-playbook.md`") points to a file that does not exist in the bundle. Not a 4 because the one reference is broken and there is no working one-level-deep reference structure.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 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 a clear, concise statement of what the skill produces but omits any explicit trigger ("Use when...") guidance. This caps completeness and leaves distinctiveness moderate. All dimensions land at the midpoint because the what is clear yet the when and breadth of triggers are missing.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when starting a new Conductor track (feature, bug, chore, or refactor) that needs a spec and phased plan."

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms users might say ("new feature", "plan a task", "scaffold a track", "conductor track").

Mention Conductor by name to sharpen distinctiveness and reduce overlap with generic planning skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Create a new track with specification and phased implementation plan" names the domain (new track) and two concrete deliverables (specification, phased plan), but coverage is not comprehensive. Not a 4 because only two actions are listed rather than several.	3 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does (create a track with spec and plan) but includes no "Use when..." trigger guidance, so per the boundary rule completeness is capped at 3. Not a 4 because the "when" is entirely absent rather than merely weak.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like "new track", "specification", and "implementation plan" are relevant and fairly natural within this domain, but common variations or synonyms are missing. Not a 4 because keyword coverage is limited to the three embedded in the action statement.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"New track" with "specification and phased implementation plan" is somewhat specific to a project-tracking workflow, but "track" is generic enough to risk overlap with similar planning skills. Not a 4 because the description does not name Conductor or otherwise narrow the niche.	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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Path: skills/conductor-new-track/SKILL.md
Commit: 1f67c44

Reviewed: about 16 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.