orchestration/to-issues
Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Specialised for the Tessl monorepo stack. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.
72
90%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
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 strong skill description that clearly communicates what the skill does (converts plans/specs/PRDs into issue tracker tickets using tracer-bullet vertical slices), its specialization (Tessl monorepo stack), and when to use it (explicit 'Use when' clause with multiple natural trigger phrases). The description is concise, uses third person voice, and provides enough specificity to distinguish it from other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: breaking plans/specs/PRDs into issues, using tracer-bullet vertical slices, specialized for Tessl monorepo stack. The description names the methodology (tracer-bullet vertical slices) and the specific domain (Tessl monorepo). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (break plans/specs/PRDs into independently-grabbable issues using tracer-bullet vertical slices) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause covering converting plans to issues, creating implementation tickets, or breaking down work into issues). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'plan', 'spec', 'PRD', 'issues', 'issue tracker', 'implementation tickets', 'break down work'. These cover common variations of how users would phrase this request. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: issue creation from plans using a specific methodology (tracer-bullet slices) for a specific stack (Tessl monorepo). The combination of plan-to-issue conversion, the methodology, and the stack specialization makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
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 that provides a clear end-to-end workflow for breaking specs into Linear issues. Its greatest strengths are the concrete MCP tool references, the well-structured 6-step process with explicit approval gates, and the detailed issue template. The main weakness is moderate verbosity in the exploratory steps and the monolithic structure, though the content density is generally justified by the complexity of the task.
Suggestions
Tighten step 2 (Explore the codebase) — the bullet list of examples could be condensed into a single rule with one illustrative example rather than four.
Consider extracting the issue template into a separate referenced file (e.g., ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md) to improve progressive disclosure and make the main skill body more scannable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is mostly efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but some sections are somewhat verbose — e.g., the detailed explanations of what to look for in the codebase (step 2) and the repeated emphasis on not guessing could be tightened. The issue template is appropriately detailed since it's a reference artifact, but the surrounding prose could be leaner. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides highly concrete, executable guidance: specific MCP tool names (mcp__linear-server__save_issue, mcp__linear-server__create_issue_relation), exact parameter names (type: 'blocks', issueId, relatedIssueId), a complete issue template with all sections, specific acceptance criteria including exact shell commands, and clear examples of good vs bad dependency naming. This is copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step process is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: step 3 requires a coverage map and user approval before proceeding, step 5 is a dedicated quiz/approval gate, and step 6 specifies dependency ordering for publishing. Feedback loops are built in — iterate until approved, flag gaps before proceeding, ask rather than guess. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear sections and a separated issue template, but it's a monolithic file with no references to supporting documents. The issue template could potentially be a separate referenced file. For a skill of this length (~150 lines of substantive content), some splitting would improve navigability, though the inline template is justified since it's the core deliverable format. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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