lading-optimize-submit
Full optimization workflow with git branch creation, commits, and optional PR. Wraps /lading-optimize-hunt with git automation.
45
47%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/lading-optimize-submit/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
17%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 too internally focused, referencing another skill ('/lading-optimize-hunt') without explaining what the optimization actually targets. It lacks a 'Use when...' clause and natural trigger terms that users would employ. The git operations mentioned are somewhat concrete but don't differentiate this skill sufficiently from generic git workflow skills.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause specifying trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to run a full lading optimization cycle with automatic git branching and PR creation.'
Replace or supplement the internal reference '/lading-optimize-hunt' with natural language describing what is being optimized (e.g., 'lading performance benchmarks', 'throughput optimization').
Include natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'optimize lading', 'performance tuning', 'benchmark optimization', 'create optimization PR'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (optimization workflow) and some actions (git branch creation, commits, PR), but 'wraps /lading-optimize-hunt with git automation' is vague about what the optimization actually does. The concrete actions listed are limited to git operations. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes a partial 'what' (git workflow wrapping another skill) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The description doesn't explain when Claude should select this skill, which caps completeness at a maximum of 2 per the rubric, and the 'what' is also weak, bringing it to 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Uses internal/technical jargon like '/lading-optimize-hunt' and 'git automation' that users would not naturally say. Missing natural trigger terms a user might use such as 'optimize', 'performance', 'benchmark', or 'lading'. The terms are too implementation-specific. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The reference to '/lading-optimize-hunt' and the specific combination of optimization + git workflow provides some distinctiveness, but 'git branch creation, commits, and optional PR' could overlap with general git workflow skills. The optimization domain is underspecified. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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 well-structured workflow skill with strong actionability and clear sequential phases. The concrete examples for branch names, commit messages, and PR creation commands make it highly executable. Minor weaknesses include some verbosity in Phase 2's responsibility delineation and the lack of bundle files to verify referenced assets like the commit template.
Suggestions
Tighten Phase 2 by condensing the 'hunt will/will NOT' lists into a single concise sentence about responsibility boundaries
Ensure the referenced commit-template.txt is included in the bundle assets so the reference is verifiable and the template doesn't need to be duplicated inline
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation, particularly the detailed list of what the hunt does and does NOT do (Phase 2), which could be tightened. The explicit enumeration of responsibilities is somewhat useful for clarity but is verbose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash commands for every step, concrete branch naming conventions with examples, a detailed commit message example with real benchmark numbers, and a complete gh pr create command with heredoc body template. Everything is copy-paste ready with clear placeholders. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequential phases (0-4) with explicit checkpoints: 'STOP if working directory is dirty,' 'CRITICAL: After hunt completes, you MUST return here to Phase 3.' The workflow handles the multi-step git automation process with clear validation gates and well-defined boundaries between this skill and the hunt skill. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References external skills (/lading-optimize-hunt, /lading-preflight) and a commit template file, which is good. However, the commit template is referenced but not provided in the bundle, and the PR body template is inlined rather than referenced from an asset. The skill is somewhat long for what could benefit from splitting the PR template into a separate asset. | 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.
- Repository
- DataDog/lading
- Commit
e98e305
- 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.