CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/bug-bash-facilitator

Builds a structured bug-bash session - pre-bash kit (charter, test-data prep, environment setup, sign-up sheet), in-bash structure (role rotation across cohorts, shared backlog board, real-time triage), scoring rubric (severity weighting, novelty bonus), and a post-bash same-day wrap-up authored by the facilitator (not a standalone debrief: for post-session writeups without a live bash, use the PROOF debrief in exploratory-testing). Use when a team needs a coordinated multi-tester sweep before a release or after a major change - converts an ad-hoc "everyone test for an hour" into a recorded, comparable session with deliverables.

72

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

85%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.

A highly actionable, well-sequenced skill with ready-to-use templates and clear validation checkpoints throughout the workflow. Conciseness is strong with minor over-explanation, and progressive disclosure is the weakest dimension because referenced bundle paths (references/tours.md, references/debrief.md) do not exist as actual files alongside the skill.

Suggestions

Create the referenced bundle files (references/tours.md, references/debrief.md) or remove/relabel the path references so navigation targets resolve to real files.

Consider extracting the large pre-bash kit and debrief templates into separate reference files and linking from the body to lighten the main SKILL.md and improve progressive disclosure.

Trim a few explanatory rationales (e.g., the cohort-swap paragraph and selected anti-pattern 'why it fails' cells) where the meaning is already clear from the row label.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean and assumes competence; the overview and step templates are tight, but a few explanatory sentences (e.g., the cohort-swap rationale and several anti-pattern elaborations) restate what a testing-aware reader already infers.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides fully copy-paste-ready templates: a complete pre-bash kit markdown, a timed in-bash schedule, a populated shared-backlog table with real example rows, a scoring rubric, and a debrief template — concrete and directly usable.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear six-step sequence (pre-bash → in-bash → board → scoring → debrief → async) with explicit validation checkpoints: test-data prep checklist, build-SHA verification, real-time triage categories, and action-item follow-ups in the debrief.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body references external skills (exploratory-testing references/tours.md and references/debrief.md, synthetic-data-toolkit) but no bundle files exist in ./references, ./scripts, or ./assets, and the large inline templates (pre-bash kit, debrief) could arguably live in separate files; structure is decent but references are not backed by real files.

3 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 strong, specific description that covers the full session lifecycle with concrete actions, an explicit trigger clause, and clear boundary guidance distinguishing it from the related exploratory-testing skill. Trigger-term coverage is good but slightly weighted toward the single "bug-bash" keyword rather than a fuller set of natural synonyms.

Suggestions

Add a couple of natural synonyms a user might actually say (e.g., 'testing event', 'group test session', 'exploratory testing sprint') alongside 'bug-bash' to broaden trigger matching.

Consider mentioning the tangible deliverable trigger (e.g., 'when the user asks for a recorded, comparable testing session with deliverables') to reinforce the distinct trigger phrase.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions across the full session lifecycle: pre-bash kit (charter, test-data prep, environment setup, sign-up sheet), in-bash structure (role rotation, shared backlog, real-time triage), scoring rubric, and post-bash wrap-up — comprehensive coverage.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (builds the kit, structure, scoring, and debrief) and when ("Use when a team needs a coordinated multi-tester sweep before a release or after a major change"), plus a clear boundary clause for when NOT to use it.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural triggers like "before a release or after a major change" and "multi-tester sweep" are present and user-facing, but it leans on phrase "bug-bash" as the core keyword and misses common synonyms/variants a user might say; good but not exhaustive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (facilitated multi-tester bug bash) with explicit disambiguation from the standalone PROOF debrief in exploratory-testing, minimizing conflict risk with related testing skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 2 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents