Loading the registry…
Use when tackling a non-trivial feature, refactor, or design problem and you want the work delegated across model tiers instead of done inline — "design and build X", "plan then implement Y the tiered way", "delegate this properly". You (the Opus coordinator) draft a rough plan WITH the user via brainstorming, hand it to design-panel — a cheap Sonnet composer picks the Opus/Fable architect(s) by default, and you override only when the user asks — to refine into a waved plan, pause for the user's approval, then run each wave through the execute-wave workflow — fresh Opus builders for substantive steps, Sonnet for mechanical, Haiku for menial, each in its own git worktree — and close with a deep review (review-panel). NOT for trivial one-line edits (just do those) or whole-repo review (use full-project-review).
Claude Skills are markdown + scripts loaded into Claude Code; scanned with the same pipeline.
We found this by crawling public sources and nobody has attested to it. That is how most of the registry gets here, and it is not a mark against the artifact — it only means no authenticated act of publication is on record. An artifact can be the vendor's own and still appear here.
Claude Skills install to a single target, no runtime picker.
nerlo install -- 'marlls1989/claude-tiered-development (tiered-development)'
Manual alternative: copy the skill folder into ~/.claude/skills/ so Claude Code loads it on next launch.
cp -r -- 'marlls1989/claude-tiered-development (tiered-development)' ~/.claude/skills/
Install respects the composite badge: Clean proceeds, Caution prompts for confirmation, and Flagged is refused. Write operations require an API token.
4 of 11 scanners examined this package. The rest do not apply to it — language, ecosystem and packaging decide which analyzers can say anything, and a scanner that cannot examine an artifact reports nothing rather than passing it.
v2.0.11
8 findings · 7.7s
v0.3.74
1 finding · 1.1s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 3.6s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 3.6s
v1.4.0
None of the entry points this scanner reads were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.2s
vv0.3.2
No Go packages were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
v0.1.0
This scanner found nothing in this artifact that it assesses. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 1.1s
v0.71.0
No dependency manifest or lockfile was found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.2s
v2.3.8
No dependency manifest or lockfile was found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.2s
v0.71.0
No container image was published for this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.0s
vv1.6.0
No Go modules were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.
| Completed | Composite | Change | Scanners | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 2026 | Caution93 | — | agentshield ·n/a: not applicablecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source ·n/a: not applicabletrivy ·n/a: not applicableosv-scanner ·n/a: not applicabletrivy_image ·n/a: not applicablegovulncheck ·n/a: not applicable | completed |
Findings in files this artifact installs stand as reported; a model re-read the rest and said which ones it believes are false positives. This is a second opinion published beside the evidence, not a correction to it: the per-scanner reports above are unchanged, every dismissed finding is still listed there at its original severity, and the score and the Caution badge are computed from those raw severities alone. Nothing below moved them.
This review has not run for this scan yet. It runs once per scan, in the background, and is kept; it appears here when it has. Until then all 9 findings above stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity.