CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

gentle-ai-chained-pr

Trigger: PRs over 400 lines, stacked PRs, review slices. Split oversized changes into chained PRs that protect review focus.

70

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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.

An exemplary instruction-only skill body: lean, rule-dense, with a clear decision gate, sequenced steps, explicit validation and rollback checkpoints, and a well-structured one-level-deep reference. The only notable gap is that executable commands and the strategy choice mechanics live entirely in the reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~40-line body is all non-obvious operational rules ("Keep each PR reviewable in about ≤60 minutes", "Treat polluted diffs as base bugs"), with zero explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padded sections.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete thresholds (400 changed lines, ≤60 minutes), a condition-to-action decision table, and exact branch-targeting rules make the guidance mostly executable; minor gaps remain because the gh commands live only in the reference file and "when none is cached" is unexplained.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The six Execution Steps are clearly sequenced with explicit validation ("Verify each PR independently: CI/tests/docs/manual checks, rollback scope, and clean diff"), an error-recovery loop ("retarget or rebase until only the current work unit appears"), and a hold checkpoint (tracker stays draft until all children integrate), so the batch-operation validation cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a lean overview with a single well-signaled, one-level-deep reference whose contents are accurately described ("strategy diagrams, PR body section, branch commands, and reviewer guidance") and verified to exist in references/chaining-details.md; details are appropriately split out.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 concise, well-targeted description that explicitly pairs a clear action with concrete trigger conditions. Its main weakness is thin capability coverage — it names only the splitting action — and a few missing natural trigger variants.

Suggestions

Expand the 'what' with 1-2 more concrete actions, e.g. "Split oversized changes into chained or stacked PRs, create tracker branches, and add dependency context to each PR" to lift specificity.

Add natural trigger variants users would actually say, such as "large PR", "diff too big to review", or "split this PR", to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Sharpen distinctiveness by leaning on the skill's unique terms (chained PRs, stacked PRs, review slices) and dropping the generic phrase "protect review focus".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Split oversized changes into chained PRs" names the PR-review domain with one concrete action, matching the '1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor; it stays below 4 because no further capabilities (tracker PRs, dependency diagrams, branch targeting) are stated.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the what ("Split oversized changes into chained PRs that protect review focus") and the when with concrete trigger phrases ("Trigger: PRs over 400 lines, stacked PRs, review slices"), matching the top anchor rather than the 4 anchor where the 'when' could be more specific.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases like "PRs over 400 lines", "stacked PRs", "review slices", and "chained PRs" give good coverage, but common variations users might say (e.g. "large PR", "split this diff", "too big to review") are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The chained/stacked-PR niche is clear with distinct trigger terms, but generic wording around "PRs" and "review focus" leaves minor overlap risk with general PR-review or code-review skills, placing it between anchors 4 and 5 but noticeably above 'somewhat specific'.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai
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.