conductor-new-track

Create a new track with specification and phased implementation plan

1.92x

Quality

31%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

98%

1.92x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/conductor-new-track/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

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 is critically underspecified. It fails to explain what kind of 'track' is being created, what domain it applies to, or when Claude should select this skill. Without context about the domain (e.g., software project, music, curriculum) and explicit trigger conditions, this description would be nearly impossible to correctly match in a multi-skill environment.

Suggestions

Clarify what 'track' means in this context and specify the domain (e.g., 'Creates a new software development track with technical specification and phased implementation milestones').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'Use when the user wants to plan a new project track, create a development roadmap, or define implementation phases'.

Include concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'defines requirements, breaks work into phases, sets milestones, generates a specification document') to distinguish it from generic planning skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description uses vague language — 'track', 'specification', and 'phased implementation plan' are abstract concepts without concrete actions. It doesn't specify what kind of track, what the specification entails, or what the implementation plan involves.	1 / 3
Completeness	The description only vaguely addresses 'what' (create a track with spec and plan) and completely lacks any 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance. There is no 'Use when...' or equivalent.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The terms 'track', 'specification', and 'phased implementation plan' are not natural keywords a user would typically say. 'Track' is especially ambiguous (music track? project track? racing track?) and the other terms are generic project management jargon.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is extremely generic and could overlap with any project planning, specification writing, or implementation planning skill. The term 'track' is ambiguous and could conflict with many different domains.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Implementation

62%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill is highly actionable with excellent workflow clarity, featuring clear sequencing, user review gates, and error handling. However, it is significantly over-verbose, embedding full file templates and interactive scripts inline that Claude could generate from brief schemas. The content would benefit greatly from splitting templates into referenced files to improve both conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Move the full markdown templates (spec.md, plan.md, metadata.json, index.md) into separate reference files and link to them from the main skill, reducing inline verbosity by ~60%.

Condense the interactive question scripts into a compact table or list format (e.g., 'Q1: Feature summary | Q2: User story | Q3: Acceptance criteria') rather than spelling out each prompt in a code block.

Remove the 'Use this skill when / Do not use this skill when' section — this is generic filler that doesn't add actionable value for Claude.

Trim the completion message template to just the essential structure; Claude can generate friendly output messages without a verbatim script.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is extremely verbose at ~250+ lines, with extensive template boilerplate that Claude could generate on its own. The full markdown templates for spec.md, plan.md, metadata.json, and index.md are spelled out in detail when a brief schema or example would suffice. The interactive question scripts are also overly detailed for Claude's capabilities.	1 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides highly concrete, executable guidance: exact file paths, directory structures, JSON schemas, markdown templates, specific naming conventions (e.g., `{shortname}_{YYYYMMDD}`), and step-by-step commands. Every step is copy-paste ready with specific formats and examples.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The workflow is clearly sequenced: pre-flight checks → classification → interactive gathering → spec generation → user review → plan generation → user review → track creation → completion message. It includes explicit validation checkpoints (user review gates after spec and plan), error handling with rollback instructions, and feedback loops for edits.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	There is one reference to `resources/implementation-playbook.md` for detailed examples, but the bulk of the content is monolithic — full templates for spec.md, plan.md, metadata.json, and index.md are all inline. These templates could be split into separate reference files, significantly reducing the main skill's length.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Commit: f5dc9e3

Reviewed: 3 days 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.