goal

Set an explicit objective, success criteria, and stopping conditions for the current OpenScience session.

Quality

68%

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 ./backend/cli/skills/other/goal/SKILL.md

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.

The body is a lean, well-structured instruction-only skill with a sequenced workflow and an explicit completion-verification gate including a blocked-state feedback loop. It is appropriately concise and well-organized for its scope.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is efficient and assumes Claude's competence without explaining known concepts, fitting 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'; not 5 because a few phrases (e.g. the long persist-checkpoint sentence) could be tightened, and not 3 because it is not noticeably verbose.	4 / 5
Actionability	As an instruction-only skill it gives concrete, specific directives ('Restate the goal', 'Keep a short visible checklist', 'Prefer real verification over confidence') with a clear ask-vs-proceed rule, matching 'mostly executable guidance; minor gaps'; not 5 because nothing is copy-paste concrete, and not 3 because the guidance is specific rather than pseudocode-level.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A 5-step sequenced Execution section plus an explicit Completion verification gate ('verify each success criterion with fresh evidence') and a blocked-state feedback loop ('report the exact blocker, the evidence gathered, and the smallest unblocking action') fit 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'; not 5 because the validate-fix-retry framing is implicit rather than an explicit loop.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Under 50 lines with no need for external references and well-organized into Contract/Execution/Completion sections, which per the rubric's simple-skill guidance earns a 5; no bundle files exist to evaluate against.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 states a clear, specific 'what' (objective, success criteria, stopping conditions) but omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps its completeness. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms like 'goal' would materially raise the score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to set a goal, define done-ness, or work toward a concrete outcome across multiple turns.'

Include the natural term 'goal' and synonyms ('objective', 'what done looks like') so the description mirrors language users actually say.

Reinforce the when-to-use boundary (multi-turn outcome work) to further reduce overlap with one-shot task skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions ('Set an explicit objective, success criteria, and stopping conditions') scoped to a domain, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; not 5 because coverage is not comprehensive and not 3 because more than 1-2 actions are named.	4 / 5
Completeness	Has a clear 'what' but no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the guideline a missing trigger caps completeness at 3 ('clear what but when is missing or only weakly implied'); not 4 because 'when' is absent rather than merely imprecise.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains relevant terms ('objective', 'success criteria', 'stopping conditions') but omits the most natural user phrasing ('goal') and common synonyms, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'; not 4 because the gaps exceed 'a few natural terms missing'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoped to 'the current OpenScience session', giving it a clear niche with only minor overlap risk against general planning skills; not 5 because it could still overlap with broad planning/planning-adjacent skills, and not 3 because it is more specific than 'somewhat specific'.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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: synthetic-sciences/openscience
Path: backend/cli/skills/other/goal/SKILL.md
Commit: 3a6c3a9

Reviewed: about 24 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.