crocoder-dev/opencode-sce-atomic-commit
Write atomic, repo-style git commits from a change summary or diff.
100
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
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 actions, uses natural developer terminology, explicitly states both capabilities and trigger conditions, and carves out a distinct niche around git commit authoring that won't overlap with other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Write atomic, repo-style git commits', 'splitting work into coherent commits', and 'reviewing whether a commit is too broad'. These are clear, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Write atomic, repo-style git commits from a change summary or diff') and when ('Use when preparing commit messages, splitting work into coherent commits, or reviewing whether a commit is too broad') with explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'git commits', 'commit messages', 'diff', 'change summary', 'splitting work', 'commit is too broad'. Good coverage of terms developers naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused specifically on git commit authoring with distinct triggers like 'atomic commits', 'repo-style', 'splitting work into commits'. Unlikely to conflict with general coding or documentation skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-crafted skill that efficiently teaches atomic commit writing. It provides concrete, actionable guidance with clear workflow steps, validation checkpoints, and explicit anti-patterns. The content respects Claude's intelligence while adding genuine value through specific patterns and decision criteria.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, assuming Claude's competence with git and commits. No unnecessary explanations of what git is or how commits work—every section adds actionable value. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete patterns (scope: Subject format), specific imperative verbs to use, clear split order, and explicit anti-patterns. The procedure is step-by-step and directly executable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 5-step procedure with explicit validation checkpoint (step 5: validate atomicity). Includes feedback loop guidance ('If atomicity fails, split further') and clear split order for complex cases. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections (Goal, Inputs, Output format, Procedure, Split guidance, Anti-patterns). For a skill of this scope (~80 lines), the structure is appropriate without needing external file references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 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