A well-structured, actionable skill body with excellent progressive disclosure and a clear sequenced workflow. Its main weakness is conciseness: time-sensitive model/version details sit in the main flow rather than a deprecated section, and some explanation could be trimmed.

Suggestions

Move time-sensitive model specifics ('openai/gpt-5.6-luna', the Jev model, 'currently') into a dedicated 'Model choice' note or a versioned/deprecated section so the main workflow stays evergreen and token-lean.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop (e.g., 'if preflight fails, fix scope/wording and re-run lint/dry-run before promoting') to raise workflow clarity for batch/CI operations.

Include a minimal copy-paste GitHub Actions workflow snippet for the CI gate so the automation step is fully executable rather than described.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient workflow prose, but it embeds time-sensitive specifics ('openai/gpt-5.6-luna', Jev model, 'currently gives a good tradeoff') outside any deprecated/old-patterns section, and a few explanatory passages could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, runnable commands and flags throughout ('tessl change verify lint --help', '--dry-run --all --show-files', '--sample <n>', '--github', '--max-calls'); the only gap is the absence of a full copy-paste CI workflow YAML.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clearly sequenced 9-step workflow with explicit preflight/backtest checkpoints and a feedback loop (step 9), but lacks the explicit validate→fix→retry recovery loops that would push it to 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview pointing to five real, well-labeled, one-level-deep reference files (cli-usage, verifier-authoring, from-context-file, historical-pr-feedback, architecture-analysis) with clear navigation.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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 specific, well-scoped description that names concrete actions and a distinct niche. Its only weakness is a relatively thin trigger-phrase set, relying largely on the single command name rather than enumerating the natural terms users would say.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions—'setting up verifier JSON checks, authoring and tuning verifiers, running lint/dry-run/sample/local preflight checks, and rolling out CI verification gates'—giving comprehensive coverage rather than vague language.	5 / 5
Completeness	Clearly states 'what' via the enumerated actions and provides explicit trigger guidance with 'Use for `tessl change verify`', but the 'when' is a single command trigger rather than a fuller set of concrete trigger phrases.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural keyword coverage ('verifier JSON', 'CI verification gates', 'pull requests', 'preflight checks') but misses common synonyms and the file extension 'tessl.json' that users would naturally mention.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Targets a clear niche (`tessl change verify`, verifier JSON, CI verification gates) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

3 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation