CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

matthew-a-carr/draft-epic

Draft an EPIC from a GitHub issue and open a PR for review. Use when triggered by a routine on `Issue opened` with label `ai:plan-epic`, or when a user asks to "draft an epic from issue #NNN". Non-interactive — proceeds on best interpretation and surfaces unresolved questions in the EPIC's §Open Questions section rather than blocking. The PR review loop resolves ambiguity. Does NOT write child SPECs — slice SPECs are drafted lazily by the `draft-spec` routine when the human files one `ai:plan` issue per slice after the EPIC PR is merged.

83

1.14x
Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

87%

1.14x

Average score across 2 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

77%

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

This is a strong, highly actionable skill with excellent workflow clarity and well-defined validation checkpoints, conditional branching, and error recovery paths. The content is mostly concise but could be tightened in a few areas (the 'What this skill is NOT' section, some redundant framing). Progressive disclosure is adequate given the single-file format, with clear references to external documents, though the overall length pushes the boundary of what should remain inline.

Suggestions

Consider trimming or removing the 'What this skill is NOT' section — these constraints are already implicit from the workflow steps and the 'When to use' section's negative criteria.

The 'Tool conventions' section says 'Same as draft-spec/SKILL.md' — either inline the 2-3 key rules or remove the section entirely to avoid a reference that adds little value on its own.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is mostly efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but there's some redundancy (e.g., the 'What this skill is NOT' section restates constraints already implied, and the tool conventions section defers to another skill's file rather than being self-contained or omitted). The 'When to use' section is thorough but slightly verbose with its negative examples.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides highly concrete, step-by-step instructions with specific tool calls (e.g., `mcp__github__create_issue_comment`, `mcp__github__add_issue_labels`), exact commit message formats, specific file paths (`docs/epics/_template.md`), branch naming conventions, and precise conditional logic (e.g., ADR status checks with exact responses). Every step is executable.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is clearly sequenced across Pre-flight → Research → Write → Self-review → Submit → If blocked, with explicit validation checkpoints (ADR status check halts with specific actions, self-review via `review-spec` and `architecture-review`, idempotency short-circuit with `ai:planned` label). Error recovery paths are well-defined (blocked flow, plugin-not-loaded fallbacks, slice count guardrails).

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references external files (`docs/epics/README.md`, `docs/epics/_template.md`, `draft-spec/SKILL.md`, `AGENTS.md`, `CONSTITUTION.md`) appropriately, but all content is inline in a single file that runs quite long. Some sections like the detailed blocker conditions or the 'What this skill is NOT' could potentially be separated. However, references are one-level deep and clearly signaled, which is good.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

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 an excellent skill description that clearly defines what the skill does (drafts EPICs from GitHub issues and opens PRs), when to use it (specific label triggers and user phrases), and what it explicitly does NOT do (write child SPECs). The description is concise yet comprehensive, with strong trigger terms and clear boundaries that minimize conflict with related skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions: drafts an EPIC from a GitHub issue, opens a PR for review, surfaces unresolved questions in the EPIC's §Open Questions section. Also clarifies what it does NOT do (write child SPECs), which adds specificity.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (draft an EPIC from a GitHub issue and open a PR) and 'when' (triggered by routine on Issue opened with label ai:plan-epic, or when user asks to draft an epic from issue #NNN). Explicit trigger guidance is provided.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes highly specific natural trigger terms: 'draft an epic from issue #NNN', 'ai:plan-epic' label, 'Issue opened' routine trigger, 'EPIC', 'PR'. These are terms a user or system would naturally use when needing this skill.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive with a clear niche: EPIC drafting from GitHub issues with specific label triggers. Explicitly distinguishes itself from the 'draft-spec' routine, reducing overlap risk with related skills.

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents