gh-create-issue

Use when user wants to create a GitHub issue for the current repository. Must read and follow the repository's issue template format.

Quality

65%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/gh-create-issue/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%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.

The body delivers a clear, actionable five-step workflow with concrete gh CLI commands and a well-placed reference file. Its main weaknesses are justificatory prose in the eligibility section and the absence of an explicit error-recovery loop around issue creation.

Suggestions

Tighten the eligibility section by moving the access-control rationale into references/engineering-task.md and keeping only the check command and the branching rule inline.

Add a short feedback loop for creation failures (e.g., if `gh issue create` fails on auth or rate limits, surface the error and retry) to push workflow clarity higher.

Replace placeholder body text in the heredoc with a brief note that the body is assembled from the selected template's sections, or link to the template structure, so the example reads as fully executable.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The workflow is mostly efficient with concrete commands, but the eligibility-check rationale ('This is a request, not an access control — nothing prevents anyone from calling gh issue create directly...') and several justificatory asides are explanatory padding that could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, executable gh/mktemp commands cover the labeled, unlabeled, typed, --template, and --web cases, but placeholders like '<title_with_template_prefix>' and '...issue body built from selected template...' leave minor gaps from fully copy-paste-ready.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1-5 are clearly sequenced with an eligibility gate and a preview/confirmation checkpoint in Step 4, but there is no error-recovery feedback loop for the creation step itself, so it falls short of the explicit-feedback-loops anchor.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-sectioned and the Engineering Task detail is split into references/engineering-task.md, a real file that is clearly signaled and one level deep; minor organization gaps (the inline eligibility prose could itself live in the reference) keep it just below the ideal.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it in third-person voice, with a distinct niche. It is held back by limited trigger-term variation and only two concrete actions.

Suggestions

Add natural trigger synonyms such as 'open an issue', 'file an issue', or 'report a bug' so the description matches more phrases users actually say.

List a couple more concrete actions (e.g., apply the template's labels and issue type, preview the body) to lift specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Make the 'when' clause more explicit with concrete trigger phrasing, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to open, file, or create a GitHub issue in the current repo.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and two concrete actions ('create a GitHub issue', 'read and follow the repository's issue template format'), matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without being comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' (create an issue, follow the template format) and 'when' ('Use when user wants to create a GitHub issue for the current repository') are present, though the trigger phrasing could be more explicit.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'create a GitHub issue' is a natural phrase users say, but common variations like 'open an issue', 'file an issue', or 'report a bug' are missing, so it stops at some-relevant-keywords.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'create a GitHub issue for the current repository' plus 'issue template format' carves a clear niche with only minor overlap risk against other gh-related skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: CherryHQ/cherry-studio
Path: .agents/skills/gh-create-issue/SKILL.md
Commit: 1219558

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.