github-issues

GitHub issue comment guidelines for community interaction. Use when: "respond to this issue", "reply to this bug report", "close this issue", or any GitHub discussion.

Quality

82%

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

82%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 well-structured, highly actionable style guide with copy-paste comment templates and clear sequencing. The main weakness is redundancy across overlapping sections (compression rule vs. fixed-issues vs. core elements) that slightly inflates length and creates minor sequencing ambiguity.

Suggestions

Consolidate the "Comment Compression Rule", "Fixed Issues", and "Core Elements" sections, which repeat overlapping guidance about acknowledgment, stating status, and closing — merge into one canonical ordered shape.

Move the four full response-example blocks into a separate examples file referenced from SKILL.md, so the overview stays lean while preserving the copy-paste templates.

Add a one-line decision rule for which comment shape to use (quick acknowledgment vs. fixed-issue vs. debugging offer) so Claude picks the right template without reconciling three overlapping sequences.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with direct templates and punchy anti-patterns, but there is redundancy between the "Comment Compression Rule", "Fixed Issues" order, and "Core Elements" sections that could be tightened.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides fully usable, copy-paste-ready comment templates with exact phrasings, specific links (cal.com, Discord), and concrete ordered steps that cover the common GitHub comment cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear sequenced workflows are present (the 4-step comment shape and fixed-issue order) and no destructive-cap applies, but the multiple overlapping "shapes" create slight sequencing ambiguity rather than one clean flow.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized with clear section headers and a clearly signaled external reference to the writing-voice skill; content is appropriately self-contained for a style guide, though everything is inline with nothing split into separate files.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

82%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 strong description that clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it, with natural trigger phrases and a well-scoped niche. The only weakness is that it names just one action area rather than enumerating several concrete capabilities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and one concrete action area ("comment guidelines for community interaction") but lists only a single action rather than several specific concrete actions, so it is not comprehensive enough for a 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly states what the skill does ("GitHub issue comment guidelines for community interaction") and provides an explicit "Use when:" clause with concrete trigger phrases, satisfying both what and when.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes several natural phrases a user would say ("respond to this issue", "reply to this bug report", "close this issue", "any GitHub discussion"), giving good keyword coverage, though a few synonyms like "triage" or "comment on a PR" are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is clearly scoped to GitHub issue/PR comment interactions with distinct, GitHub-specific triggers, giving minimal overlap risk with unrelated skills.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 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: 2 missing, 1 suspicious	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: EpicenterHQ/epicenter
Path: .agents/skills/github-issues/SKILL.md
Commit: ecba024

Reviewed: 4 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.