CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/slo-negotiation-prep

Build-an-X workflow that produces the manager's prep pack for the QA - SRE - Product SLO conversation - current error-budget consumption + MTTR/MTBF trend + a single framed decision question + an explicit 3-5 option matrix with reversibility / stakeholder cost / impact scoring + recommended posture with cited alternatives. Consumes existing SLI / SLO / error-budget math and per-incident MTTR / MTBF metrics rather than computing them. Use when budget is burning or a proposed change will stress the SLO - the output is the evidence pack the manager carries into the meeting, not a recommendation about which option to pick.

64

Quality

81%

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

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

70%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A clearly sequenced, well-disclosed negotiation-prep skill with strong workflow clarity and a real one-level reference bundle. Its weaknesses are verbosity (repeated cross-references and a duplicate References section) and the fact that actionable artifacts live only in the reference rather than inline.

Suggestions

Consolidate the recurring 'See references/worked-example.md' inline pointers into a single callout; the section already points to the same file repeatedly.

Inline a minimal skeleton of the option matrix table or the Claim|Source audit table in the body so the skill is actionable without opening the reference.

Trim the References list to sources not already cited inline to reduce token cost.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely efficient and assumes Claude's knowledge of SLO/error-budget concepts, but it is long and somewhat padded with repeated 'See references/worked-example.md' pointers, extended prose explanations of intent, and the 8-item References list that largely duplicates inline citations.

2 / 3

Actionability

Guidance is concrete in shape (named sections, a defined option matrix with three scoring axes, halt codes) but largely instructional rather than executable: there is no code, command, or template a model runs, and the worked examples live only in the reference rather than inline.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step sequence (inputs -> evidence pack -> option matrix -> posture -> audit appendix) with explicit validation checkpoints: halt codes NO_DECISION_FRAMED and MISSING_SLO, freshness confirmation before the meeting, and a Claim|Source audit appendix that closes the loop.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-organized overview with a single one-level-deep reference (references/worked-example.md, verified to exist) signaled repeatedly at the relevant steps; no nested reference chains and content is appropriately split between overview and worked example.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

82%

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 highly specific, complete description with an explicit use-when clause and clear separation from sibling compute skills. Its only weakness is trigger terms that are domain-internal rather than natural user phrasing, and it is verbose relative to the concise exemplars.

Suggestions

Trim the parenthetical expansion (the 3-5 option matrix axis list) to make the description less padded while keeping the concrete actions.

Add at least one user-natural trigger phrasing (e.g., 'Use when the team is arguing about whether to ship, freeze, or renegotiate the SLO') alongside the technical 'budget is burning' phrasing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions: produces current error-budget consumption, MTTR/MTBF trend, a framed decision question, an explicit 3-5 option matrix scored on three axes, and a recommended posture with cited alternatives.

3 / 3

Completeness

It explicitly answers what ('produces the manager's prep pack... with option matrix... recommended posture') and when ('Use when budget is burning or a proposed change will stress the SLO'), with an explicit trigger clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It contains strong domain-specific triggers like 'budget is burning', 'error-budget consumption', 'SLO', and 'stress the SLO', but these are technical rather than the natural phrasing a non-specialist user would say, and common variations are thin.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche (SLO negotiation prep pack for the QA-SRE-Product meeting) and distinguishes itself from sibling compute skills by stating it consumes rather than computes SLI/SLO/MTTR metrics, making mis-trigger unlikely.

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents