workflow-patterns
Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
64
47%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.75xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/conductor/skills/workflow-patterns/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
40%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 relies heavily on abstract concepts and proprietary terminology ('Conductor', 'phase checkpoints', 'verification protocol') without explaining what concrete actions the skill performs. While it includes a 'Use when...' clause, the trigger terms are a mix of jargon and generic phrases that don't clearly communicate the skill's unique value or help Claude reliably select it over similar skills.
Suggestions
Replace vague phrases like 'implementing tasks' and 'handling phase checkpoints' with specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Runs test suites, validates red/green/refactor phases, creates phase-specific git commits').
Add natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'test-driven development', 'red-green-refactor', 'TDD cycle', 'task phases', or 'test verification'.
Briefly explain what 'Conductor' and 'verification protocol' are so the description is self-contained and Claude can distinguish this skill from general TDD or git skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'implementing tasks', 'handling phase checkpoints', 'managing git commits', and 'understanding the verification protocol' without listing concrete actions. It names concepts but doesn't describe what the skill actually does (e.g., no specific actions like 'runs tests', 'creates commits', 'validates phases'). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description has a 'Use when...' clause addressing when to use the skill, but the 'what does this do' part is weak — it only vaguely references handling phases, managing commits, and understanding a protocol without explaining what concrete outcomes the skill produces. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords like 'TDD', 'git commits', 'verification protocol', and 'Conductor' that could match user queries. However, 'phase checkpoints' and 'verification protocol' are jargon-heavy, and common variations like 'test-driven development', 'red-green-refactor', or 'task workflow' are missing. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of 'Conductor' and 'TDD workflow' provides some distinctiveness, but 'managing git commits' and 'implementing tasks' are generic enough to overlap with general git or task management skills. The proprietary terms help but aren't sufficient to fully disambiguate. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
55%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides highly actionable and well-sequenced workflow guidance for TDD task implementation with strong validation checkpoints and error recovery paths. However, it is severely bloated—much content is redundant or explains concepts Claude already knows—and everything is crammed into a single monolithic document with no progressive disclosure or external references. Cutting this to roughly one-third its current length and splitting detailed sections into linked files would dramatically improve its effectiveness.
Suggestions
Reduce content by at least 50%: eliminate redundant sections (git commit format appears twice, checkpoint concepts repeated in 3+ places), remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows (what TDD is, what commit types mean, why checkpoints matter), and cut the 'Best Practices' section which restates earlier content.
Split into multiple files: move 'TDD Variations by Task Type,' 'Handling Deviations,' 'Error Recovery,' and 'Checkpoint Verification Details' into separate linked reference files, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with the core 11-step lifecycle and phase completion protocol.
Remove the 'Performance Considerations' and 'Working with Existing Tests' sections entirely—these are general software engineering knowledge Claude already possesses and add no skill-specific value.
Add a quick-reference summary at the top (task lifecycle in ~10 lines) so Claude can get the essential workflow without reading 400+ lines.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. Contains significant redundancy (git commit format explained twice, checkpoint concepts repeated across multiple sections, verification steps duplicated). Sections like 'Why Checkpoints Matter,' 'Performance Considerations,' and 'Best Practices' largely restate what was already covered. Many concepts Claude already knows (what TDD is, what commit types mean, basic testing practices) are explained at length. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable commands (pytest, git, ruff, mypy), concrete code examples (Python tests, bash commands), specific markdown formats for plan updates, and copy-paste ready commit message templates. The 11-step lifecycle and phase completion protocol are highly concrete and specific. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 11-step TDD lifecycle is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (run tests at RED, GREEN, and REFACTOR stages; verify coverage at step 6; explicit WAIT for user approval at phase completion). Error recovery paths are well-defined with feedback loops (failed tests → revert → re-approach; checkpoint rejection → remediation → re-request). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content is inline despite being extremely long. Sections like 'TDD Variations by Task Type,' 'Checkpoint Verification Details,' 'Manual Verification Guidance,' and 'Handling Deviations' could easily be split into separate reference files. No navigation aids or cross-references exist. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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 (624 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
27a7ed9
- 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.