spec-driven-magic/sdx-project
Initializing codebase and spec-driven configuration for new project based on existing concept file
94
94%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
95%
7.30xAverage score across 5 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-crafted skill description that excels across all dimensions. It provides specific concrete actions, includes comprehensive natural trigger terms with example phrases, explicitly addresses both what and when, and carves out a distinct niche around spec-driven project initialization with OpenSpec tooling.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Sets up repository structure, OpenSpec configuration, tech stack scaffolding, testing infrastructure, agent configs, and creates the full set of OpenSpec change proposals.' These are detailed, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (initializes spec-driven projects, sets up structure, scaffolding, configs, creates change proposals) AND when with an explicit 'Use when:' clause containing multiple trigger scenarios and example phrases. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'new project', 'initialize a repository', 'bootstrap a codebase', 'scaffold a project', 'create a repo from spec', 'new project setup', 'kick off a project', 'set up a new repo', 'design docs', 'concept file'. These match how users naturally phrase requests. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused on spec-driven/OpenSpec project initialization from concept documents. The specific mention of 'OpenSpec configuration', 'change proposals', and 'concept document' creates a distinct identity unlikely to conflict with generic project scaffolding skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, well-structured skill with excellent workflow clarity and actionability. The 14-step process includes proper validation checkpoints, error handling, and concrete commands. Minor verbosity in input descriptions and some explanatory text could be trimmed to improve token efficiency.
Suggestions
Trim the Inputs section by removing explanatory phrases like 'a markdown file describing...' since Claude understands document types from context
Consolidate the validation rule callout into the step where validation occurs rather than as a separate highlighted block
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundant explanations (e.g., explaining what each input is when Claude would understand from context). The validation rule callout and some step descriptions could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash commands, specific file paths, exact placeholder names to replace, and concrete examples of the proposal.md structure. Commands are copy-paste ready with clear variable substitution patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-step workflow with 14 clearly numbered steps, explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., 'Verify success: Confirm the openspec/ directory was created'), error handling instructions ('stop immediately and report'), and clear feedback loops for failures. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections, appropriate use of references to external files (stack READMEs, templates), and a clean hierarchy. The References section at the end provides one-level-deep navigation to detailed materials. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
Reviewed
Table of Contents