git

Git commits and branches using Epicenter conventions. Use when staging files, writing commit messages, splitting commits, checking standalone commits, creating branches, or inspecting commit history. For pull request titles and bodies, use the pull-request skill.

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is highly actionable and well-structured with clear version-bump logic and one-level-deep sibling links, but it carries some redundancy and generic definitions Claude does not need. Tightening the overlapping scope sections and trimming obvious commit-type glosses would lift conciseness.

Suggestions

Consolidate 'When to Use Scope' and 'When NOT to Use Scope' into the 'Scope Guidelines' section to remove overlapping restatements.

Trim generic glosses on common commit types (e.g. 'refactor: Code changes that neither fix bugs nor add features') down to a bare list, since Claude already knows conventional-commits semantics.

Replace the verbose good-vs-bad commit narrative with a single compact example showing the body explaining the 'why', to save tokens without losing the lesson.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient and actionable, but it re-explains concepts Claude already knows (generic commit-type definitions like 'refactor: Code changes that neither fix bugs nor add features') and restates scope guidance across three overlapping sections, so it could be tightened further.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready examples ('feat(transcription): add model selection for OpenAI providers'), precise rules (lowercase, imperative mood, <50-72 chars), and exact version-scheme mechanics ('8.Y.Z', 'feat(api)!: ...', 'BREAKING CHANGE:' footer).	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The breaking-change/version-bump section is a clear sequenced decision flow (Patch default → '!' for Minor → manual Major → footer), and there are no destructive batch operations requiring validate-retry loops that would cap the score at 2.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Keeps rules inline in a single well-organized file and links sibling skills one level deep with clearly signaled paths ([standalone-commits], [pull-request]); no nested references, fitting the simple-skill allowance.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

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.

The description is specific, trigger-rich, and complete with an explicit 'Use when' clause, while clearly distinguishing itself from the pull-request skill. It is a strong, concise description with no notable gaps.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions ('staging files, writing commit messages, splitting commits, checking standalone commits, creating branches, or inspecting commit history'), matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than only naming a domain.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Git commits and branches using Epicenter conventions') and when via an explicit 'Use when ...' clause, so it does not cap at 2.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Covers natural phrasing a user would actually say — 'writing commit messages', 'splitting commits', 'staging files', 'creating branches', 'inspecting commit history' — rather than technical jargon.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Carves a clear git-commits niche with distinct triggers and explicitly routes PR work to a separate skill ('For pull request titles and bodies, use the pull-request skill'), making misfires unlikely.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 4 suspicious	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: EpicenterHQ/epicenter
Path: .agents/skills/git/SKILL.md
Commit: cb12bcc

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.