CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

business-initiative-coach

Compatibility entrypoint for the former business-initiative-coach name. Use only when an existing instruction or invocation names it; new workflows should use frame-intent for outcomes, assumptions, and leading indicators before specification.

Quality

80%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/business-initiative-coach/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 well-designed rename shim: lean, well-sectioned, with a genuinely actionable standalone fallback whose steps specify exactly what to record. Its only notable gap is the absence of a worked example of the intent brief it asks the agent to produce.

Suggestions

Add a compact example intent brief (3-5 lines) after the standalone steps so the expected output artifact is concrete rather than implied by its field list.

Fold the Source section's pointer into the opening redirect paragraph to remove the second reference to ../frame-intent/SKILL.md and shave a few tokens.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The steps are dense and telegraphic ("with IDs, evidence for and against, confidence, and what would disprove them") with zero concept-explanation padding, but minor meta-redundancy — frame-intent is pointed to twice (intro and Source) and "Mention the new name once when useful" is trimmable — keeps it at anchor 4 rather than 5's 'every token earns its place'.

4 / 5

Actionability

Field-level concrete guidance ("a measure, population, baseline, proposed target or threshold, source, owner, review timing, and what different results would change") makes the instruction-only skill genuinely executable, but no example intent brief is included, leaving a minor gap between anchor 4 and 5's 'specific examples cover the common cases'.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 6-step sequence with an entry decision (sibling installed → redirect), a step-1 fallback ("Otherwise ask one or two consequential questions... and draft the usable parts provisionally"), a step-5 evidence-check branch, and step-6 quality gates ("Separate confirmed, inferred, proposed, and unknown claims; invent no evidence") — anchor 4, since there is no explicit re-check/error-recovery loop to reach anchor 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

An under-50-line skill with well-organized sections, one clearly signaled one-level-deep external reference, and a complete inline fallback explicitly justified for the sibling-absent case ("If only this directory was copied into a skill installation, the sibling may not exist. Use these essentials locally") — meets the simple-skill provision for anchor 5.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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.

A precise, honest compatibility-shim description: it answers what and when explicitly, resolves conflict with the canonical skill by design, and avoids over-claiming. Its weaknesses are inherent to the shim role — thin capability listing and a single trigger phrase with no synonyms.

Suggestions

Add one or two natural trigger synonyms (e.g., "business initiative", "initiative coaching") to the 'Use only when' clause so users who half-remember the old name still route correctly, while keeping the narrow trigger.

Name the one concrete action a caller gets ("loads and follows frame-intent's intent-brief procedure") so the 'what' describes a capability, not just the entrypoint role.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Compatibility entrypoint for the former business-initiative-coach name" names the domain and its redirect action, and "outcomes, assumptions, and leading indicators before specification" adds scope, but the capability actions are meta-level (redirect, defer) rather than a list of several concrete operations — anchor 3, not 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: what ("Compatibility entrypoint for the former business-initiative-coach name") and when ("Use only when an existing instruction or invocation names it"), a concrete trigger phrase that fully matches anchor 5 rather than anchor 4's 'when could be more explicit'.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The only natural trigger phrase is the skill's own former name ("business-initiative-coach"), which legacy callers would literally say, but common variations like "business initiative", "initiative coaching", or "intent framing" are absent — anchor 3 (relevant keywords, missing variations), not 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The trigger is the exact legacy name — a clear niche with a distinct trigger — and "new workflows should use frame-intent" explicitly resolves the overlap with the canonical sibling, so conflict risk is minimal (anchor 5, not 4's 'minor overlap risk').

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

yyeret/ai-impact

Path

skills/business-initiative-coach/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.