bug-history-summarizer
Summarizes the complete lifecycle of a bug across code versions, tracking its introduction, detection, fixing attempts, and regression history. Use when users need to: (1) Understand how a bug evolved over time, (2) Trace when and how a bug was introduced, (3) Analyze fix attempts and their effectiveness, (4) Identify regression patterns, (5) Generate bug lifecycle reports for documentation or post-mortems. Takes a repository, bug identifier, and version history as input.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE --skill bug-history-summarizer90
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
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 an excellent skill description that clearly articulates specific capabilities (lifecycle tracking, regression analysis, report generation), provides explicit trigger conditions via a numbered 'Use when' list, and uses natural developer terminology. The description is well-structured, uses proper third-person voice, and carves out a distinct niche that won't conflict with general debugging or code review skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Summarizes the complete lifecycle', 'tracking its introduction, detection, fixing attempts, and regression history', 'Trace when and how a bug was introduced', 'Analyze fix attempts', 'Identify regression patterns', 'Generate bug lifecycle reports'. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (summarizes bug lifecycle, tracks introduction/detection/fixing/regression) AND when with explicit 'Use when users need to:' clause listing five specific trigger scenarios. Also specifies inputs required. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'bug', 'regression', 'fix attempts', 'post-mortems', 'bug lifecycle', 'version history', 'bug identifier'. These are terms developers naturally use when investigating bugs. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche focusing specifically on bug lifecycle analysis across versions. The combination of 'bug lifecycle', 'regression history', and 'fix attempts' creates a clear, unique domain unlikely to conflict with general code analysis or debugging 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 solid skill with excellent actionability and workflow clarity. The step-by-step process is well-defined with concrete examples and executable git commands. However, it could be more concise by removing explanatory tips that Claude already knows, and the lengthy content would benefit from splitting reference material into separate files.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly trim the 'Tips for Effective Bug History Analysis' section - these are concepts Claude already understands
Move the 'Git Commands Reference' section to a separate REFERENCE.md file and link to it
Tighten the workflow step descriptions by removing phrases like 'Document when and how the bug was discovered' which are self-evident from the section title
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation. Tips like 'Start with the fix - Work backwards from the fix commit to understand the bug' explain concepts Claude already knows. The workflow steps contain some verbose descriptions that could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable git commands with clear syntax. The example section demonstrates a complete analysis process with specific inputs and outputs. The Git Commands Reference section is copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 6-step sequential workflow with explicit checkpoints. Each step has clear sub-tasks and the process flows logically from identification through analysis to report generation. The example demonstrates the complete workflow in practice. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-structured with clear sections, but everything is inline in a single file. The Git Commands Reference and Tips sections could be separate reference files. For a skill of this length (~200 lines), some content could be split out for better organization. | 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
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.