CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

delivery-flow

Carries a code change through to a tested, verified and reviewed local change, loading the stage skill for each step: planning, test-first implementation, debugging, verification and review. Use when a request asks for code to change, whether it arrives as an approved ticket or a one-line message: a bug fix, a failing test or crash, a small feature or flag, a behavior change, or review comments to fix. Not for questions about the code, for merging or deleting a finished branch, or for deciding which review comments to accept without changing code. Use it whenever the work will change code, even when the user does not mention tests, review or a pull request.

78

Quality

98%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

100%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, exemplary router: the body adds only what a router must contribute (sequencing, load conditions, authorization boundaries, feedback loop) and delegates all stage detail to the loaded skills. No padding, no gaps in the sequence, and appropriately small for its scope.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~28-line body is lean with zero padding: every line is a routing rule, a load condition, or a contract constraint. No concepts Claude already knows are explained ('Mentioning a skill or paraphrasing it is not equivalent to loading it' is a behavioral rule, not a concept explainer).

5 / 5

Actionability

Instruction-only skill with fully actionable guidance: named skills to load verbatim ('writing-plans', 'systematic-debugging', 'verification-before-completion'), exact load conditions, a concrete alternative for the narrow case ('record a concise working plan instead'), and specific prohibitions ('Never push, merge, open a pull request, or delete a worktree without explicit authorization').

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 1–6 sequence is explicit with an ordering rationale, a validation gate ('verification-before-completion' before claiming completion), and a feedback loop (step 5: if findings, load 'receiving-code-review', address them, and return to verification). Evidence retention is required at each stage.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no need for external references — the detail lives in the stage skills it routes to, not in this bundle. Two well-organized sections ('Required stage loading', 'Routing contract') satisfy the simple-skill exception; no bundle files exist to misorganize.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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.

An excellent description: explicit what/when, concrete stage names, natural trigger phrases with synonyms, and valuable negative boundaries. The only weakness is trigger overlap with the specialist stage skills it routes to, which is inherent to a router skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates concrete actions — 'planning, test-first implementation, debugging, verification and review' — and a concrete outcome ('a tested, verified and reviewed local change'), giving comprehensive coverage of the router's scope rather than the minor gaps of a 4.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ('Carries a code change through to a tested, verified and reviewed local change') and when ('Use when a request asks for code to change... Use it whenever the work will change code'), and adds explicit negative triggers ('Not for questions about the code, for merging or deleting a finished branch').

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes the natural phrases users actually say: 'a bug fix', 'a failing test or crash', 'a small feature or flag', 'a behavior change', or 'review comments to fix', plus variations like 'an approved ticket or a one-line message' — comprehensive synonym coverage.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear and the negative cases ('Not for... deciding which review comments to accept without changing code') reduce conflict, but triggers like 'failing test', 'crash', and 'bug fix' overlap heavily with the very stage skills it routes to (test-driven-development, systematic-debugging), which is more than minimal overlap risk.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

tesslio/tessl-eval-demo

Path

00-activation-testing/after/plugins/sdlc-router/skills/delivery-flow/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.