CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

feasibility-reviewer

Evaluates whether proposed technical approaches in planning documents will survive contact with reality -- architecture conflicts, dependency gaps, migration risks, and implementability. Spawned by the document-review skill.

68

Quality

83%

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%

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 tight, actionable instruction set for a feasibility review: concrete checks, explicit confidence calibration, and clear scoping of what to ignore, with no padding of concepts Claude already knows.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: it never explains known concepts and each section (checks, calibration, exclusions) earns its place, with only brief stylistic flourishes.

3 / 3

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and specific for an instruction-only skill: 'trace four paths: happy, nil, empty, error', numeric confidence thresholds (0.80+, 0.60-0.79, below 0.50), and 'Back-of-envelope math is sufficient'.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The review task is unambiguous with organized checks, a clear operating rule ('Apply each check only when relevant'), and a confidence-gate checkpoint that suppresses findings below 0.50.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A self-contained, well-sectioned file under 50 lines with no need for external references, satisfying the simple-skill allowance for progressive disclosure.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Description

67%

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 specific and well-scoped with a clear niche, but it omits an explicit 'Use when' trigger and leans on technical phrasing rather than natural user-spoken terms, capping completeness and trigger quality at 2.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers (e.g., 'Use when reviewing a planning doc, RFC, or design proposal for whether it can actually be built').

Soften technical jargon ('survive contact with reality') with a few common user-spoken variations like 'plan review', 'design review', or 'feasibility check'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete capabilities ('architecture conflicts, dependency gaps, migration risks, and implementability') alongside the domain of 'planning documents', matching the anchor for listing several specific concrete actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' but only implies 'when' via 'Spawned by the document-review skill' with no explicit 'Use when' trigger, which the guidelines cap at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like 'planning documents' and 'technical approaches' are reasonably natural, but the description leans on technical phrasing and lacks common user-spoken variations or an explicit trigger clause.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche (feasibility review of planning documents) and is parented by document-review, making it unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

81%

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

Validation13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
udecode/plate
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.