CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

issue-reporter

只在用户明确要求提交 GitHub Issue、GitHub Bug Report 或 GitHub Feature Request 时使用。用户只说“提交问题”“提交反馈”“上报 bug”“这是个 bug”或描述功能建议但未点名 GitHub 时不得触发,必须改用 cherry-studio-feedback 并默认提交飞书。

73

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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.

A concise, well-structured, highly actionable skill body with clear sequenced workflows and validation checkpoints including user confirmation and dedup before submit. The main improvement areas are specifying the gh issue create invocation fully and adding an explicit error-recovery/duplicate-handling feedback loop.

Suggestions

Specify the gh issue create invocation concretely (e.g., gh issue create --repo CherryHQ/cherry-studio --title "..." --body-file <filled-template>) so the submission step is copy-paste ready.

Add an explicit feedback loop for the dedup result (e.g., if an open duplicate is found, link to it and skip creation) and for create failures (retry / fall back to local mode), which would lift workflow_clarity to 5.

Clarify how the .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE YAML template is filled from the collected fields before preview, so the template-to-submission path is unambiguous.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and token-efficient throughout: dense arrow-notation workflows, concrete one-line commands, and a compact markdown template, with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete executable commands (gh auth status, gh search issues with full flags, gh issue create), specific template/file paths, URLs, and a copy-paste local-mode template; minor gap is that gh issue create is given without --title/--body flags and the template-filling step is described as a process rather than shown as executable code.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequenced workflows (collect → dedup → read template → preview → confirm → create → report link) with validation checkpoints (auth-detect branching, dedup, preview, mandatory user confirmation before submit) and per-item confirmation in the batch flow; held below 5 because there is no explicit error-recovery feedback loop for create failures or duplicate handling.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A self-contained single-file skill under 50 lines with no bundle files and well-organized sections (触发边界, 检测 GitHub 登录, GitHub 模式, 本地模式, 注意), satisfying the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

95%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.

A tightly written, boundary-aware description that excels at trigger-term coverage, completeness, and distinctiveness, explicitly disambiguating from a sibling skill. The only minor gap is that the breadth of capabilities (collection, dedup, templating) lives in the body rather than the description, leaving specificity just shy of comprehensive.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete actions (submit GitHub Issue/Bug Report/Feature Request, redirect to cherry-studio-feedback and default to Feishu), but the description is weighted toward trigger/boundary conditions rather than comprehensively listing capabilities like info collection, dedup, and templating that live in the body.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (submit GitHub Issue/Bug Report/Feature Request, else redirect to cherry-studio-feedback/Feishu) and when ("只在…时使用" Use-when clause) with concrete trigger and anti-trigger phrases, so the missing-Use-when cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive coverage of natural user phrases including synonyms and the exact utterances users would say ("提交问题", "提交反馈", "上报 bug", "这是个 bug", "功能建议") alongside the formal GitHub terms, with clear positive and negative triggers.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (GitHub submissions for CherryHQ/cherry-studio) with explicit conflict resolution against the sibling skill cherry-studio-feedback, including the exact anti-trigger conditions that route to it, minimizing wrong-skill activation.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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
CherryHQ/cherry-studio
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.