CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

codew-release-qa-sweep

Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done: run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets.

Quality

88%

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

96%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 excellent, execution-ready QA gate skill: exact commands in order with stop-on-failure validation, three concrete manual TUI targets with regression refs and observable keybinding contracts, and a reporting format that forbids implied coverage. The only structural improvement is splitting the detailed TUI regression playbooks into a reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and dense: every line is a gate command, a binding, a regression ref, or a reporting rule. It explains no concepts Claude already knows and assumes competence throughout, matching the 'every token earns its place' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

The gate sweep is a fully executable, copy-paste-ready bash block (cargo fmt/test/build, npm test, check-versions.sh, --version smoke), and the manual QA targets specify exact keybindings (Esc, Enter, Ctrl+Enter, Shift+Enter, Ctrl+G/Ctrl+S) and observable outcomes. This matches the fully-executable anchor 5.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Explicit sequencing ('Run from the repo root, in order. Stop on the first failure and report it') with validation checkpoints built in: stop-on-failure, the merge-tree mergeability check, and a reporting format that mandates per-command pass/fail and explicit disclosure of skipped steps. This matches the clear-sequence-with-explicit-validation anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized and the single file is appropriately self-contained for a gate checklist, but at ~115 lines with zero reference files, detailed sub-scenarios (e.g., the multi-step Windows Terminal retest path) are inlined where a one-level-deep reference file would keep SKILL.md a tighter overview. Anchor 4 ('good structure, minor organization gaps') is the best fit.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

73%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, third-person description with an explicit trigger clause and a distinct niche, held back mainly by a high-level 'what' — the gate sweep and QA targets are named but not characterized. It reads naturally and would trigger correctly, but enumerating one or two more concrete actions would lift it to the top anchors.

Suggestions

Name one or two concrete gate examples in the description (e.g., 'run cargo/npm gates and the version-drift check') so the 'what' goes beyond 'full gate sweep'.

Add a common synonym trigger such as 'ship', 'publish', or 'release candidate' alongside 'release work is done' to broaden natural-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("Codewhale release work") and two concrete actions ("run the full gate sweep", "list the manual QA targets"), matching the 1-2 concrete actions anchor. It is not a 4 because 'full gate sweep' is left unpacked — the specific gates are not named, leaving coverage incomplete.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present and explicit: the what ("run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets") and a clear when-clause ("Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done"). It falls short of anchor 5 because the what stays high-level — only two actions named, without the concrete trigger-phrase richness of the anchor-5 example.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage: "release work is done", "gate sweep", "QA", "manual QA targets" are phrases a maintainer would plausibly say. A few natural synonyms are missing (e.g., 'ship', 'publish', 'merge-ready', 'release candidate'), keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Codewhale" plus the narrow release-QA framing carves out a clear project-specific niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk with other skills.

5 / 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

Hmbown/Codewhale

Path

docs/skills/codew-release-qa-sweep/SKILL.md

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.