CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

azure-sdk-mgmt-pr-review

Review Azure SDK management-plane pull requests, check naming conventions, API compatibility, and code quality.

60

Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/azure-sdk-mgmt-pr-review/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

This is a high-quality, action-oriented skill body: it sequences a multi-phase review workflow with validation checkpoints, gives executable scanner commands and precise comment-target rules, and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows. Its main gap is the absence of reference/bundle files to offload the extensive rule catalog, which would improve progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes Claude's domain competence (no preamble explaining what Azure SDK, ApiCompat, or TypeSpec are), with tight tables and bullet rules; it is somewhat long but virtually every token carries review-specific guidance, with only minor sections that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides executable PowerShell scanner commands with concrete flags and path examples, exact file-target resolution rules, specific TypeSpec/@@clientName fix recommendations, and precise naming tables — copy-paste-ready guidance covering the common review cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The three-phase workflow is explicitly sequenced with ordering rules ('Run phases in order'), conditional continuation criteria, validation checkpoints (fetch existing comments to suppress duplicates, investigate every OPTPARAM finding, ApiCompat-passing is not sufficient), and clear blocking/non-blocking feedback loops tied to the severity table.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-organized into clearly labeled phases and subsections with tables and rule families; however, there are no bundle/reference files present, so a large body of detailed rules lives inline in SKILL.md rather than being split into one-level-deep reference files, leaving minor organization gaps.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

53%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is specific and distinctive, clearly identifying the Azure SDK management-plane PR review niche, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and stops at generic action verbs. It is solid but could be made more complete and trigger-rich.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause stating when Claude should invoke this skill (e.g. 'Use when reviewing Azure SDK for .NET management-plane pull requests, or when the user mentions mgmt SDK PRs, ARM SDK naming, or breaking changes').

Strengthen trigger-term coverage by including natural user phrasings and synonyms such as 'mgmt SDK', 'ARM SDK', and 'breaking change detection'.

Sharpen the action verbs beyond generic 'review'/'check' by naming the three review phases (versioning, API review, breaking-change detection) referenced in the body.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain (Azure SDK management-plane PRs) and lists concrete actions (review PRs, check naming conventions, check API compatibility, check code quality), but the action verbs are generic ('review', 'check') and the coverage is bounded rather than comprehensive.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does (review Azure SDK mgmt PRs across naming, API compatibility, code quality), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit guidance on when Claude should invoke it, which caps completeness at 3 per the guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant keywords like 'Azure SDK', 'management-plane', 'pull requests', 'naming conventions', 'API compatibility', but is missing common user phrasings or synonyms (e.g. 'mgmt', 'ARM', 'breaking change') that a user might naturally say.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The scope is narrowly scoped to 'Azure SDK management-plane' PRs, a clear niche with distinct triggers; only minor overlap risk exists with a generic PR-review or Azure data-plane SDK skill.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Azure/azure-sdk-for-net
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.