track-management
Use this skill when creating, managing, or working with Conductor tracks - the logical work units for features, bugs, and refactors. Applies to spec.md, plan.md, and track lifecycle operations.
66
51%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
96%
2.40xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/conductor/skills/track-management/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
75%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 has good completeness with an explicit 'Use when' clause and is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with other skills. However, it lacks specific concrete actions (what exactly does managing tracks entail?) and could benefit from more natural trigger terms that users would actually say. The use of second person ('Use this skill') is noted but the rubric specifically penalizes first/second person voice for specificity.
Suggestions
List specific concrete actions such as 'Creates spec.md files, generates implementation plans in plan.md, tracks feature/bug/refactor progress through lifecycle stages'
Add more natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'start a new feature', 'plan implementation', 'track status', 'write a specification', or 'break down work'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain ('Conductor tracks') and mentions some artifacts (spec.md, plan.md, track lifecycle operations), but doesn't list specific concrete actions like 'create spec files', 'generate plans', 'update track status', etc. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Explicitly answers both 'what' (creating, managing, working with Conductor tracks including spec.md, plan.md, and lifecycle operations) and 'when' ('Use this skill when creating, managing, or working with Conductor tracks'). Has a clear 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms like 'tracks', 'spec.md', 'plan.md', 'features', 'bugs', 'refactors', but these are somewhat tool-specific jargon. Missing natural user phrases like 'start a new feature', 'plan work', 'track progress', or 'create a specification'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is clearly scoped to 'Conductor tracks' with specific file references (spec.md, plan.md) and lifecycle operations, making it highly distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
27%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is comprehensive in coverage but severely over-documented for its purpose. It contains useful templates and conventions (status markers, ID format, file structures) buried within excessive explanatory content that Claude doesn't need. The biggest issues are the monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure and significant verbosity explaining obvious concepts like track types and sizing heuristics.
Suggestions
Extract the spec.md template, plan.md template, metadata.json schema, and track patterns into separate referenced files (e.g., SPEC_TEMPLATE.md, PLAN_TEMPLATE.md) and link to them from a concise overview.
Remove the Track Types section explanations (Claude knows what features, bugs, and refactors are) - keep only the type names and any non-obvious conventions.
Remove or drastically condense the Track Sizing Guidelines and Best Practices sections - these are general project management wisdom Claude already knows.
Add explicit error recovery steps to workflows, e.g., 'If verification fails at phase completion: mark tasks back to [~], diagnose failure, fix, re-verify before proceeding.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. Explains concepts Claude already understands (what a feature is, what a bug is, what dependencies are). Track types section, sizing guidelines, and best practices are largely common sense that doesn't need explicit documentation. Much of this could be condensed to templates and key conventions only. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete templates for spec.md, plan.md, metadata.json, and tracks.md which are useful and copy-paste ready. However, the actual operations (creating, completing, reverting tracks) reference commands like `/conductor:new-track` without explaining what they do mechanically, and many sections are descriptive checklists rather than executable instructions. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The track lifecycle is clearly sequenced (Creation → Implementation → Completion) with numbered steps, and phase completion includes verification checkpoints. However, there are no explicit error recovery/feedback loops - e.g., what happens if verification fails, if a revert goes wrong, or if spec review reveals issues. The validation steps are present but lack feedback loops. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. The spec.md template, plan.md template, metadata.json schema, track patterns, quality checklists, and sizing guidelines could all be separate referenced documents. Everything is inlined, making this extremely long and hard to navigate. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (594 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- wshobson/agents
- Commit
70444e5
- 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.