CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

codew-release-qa-sweep

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

68

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

The risk profile of this skill

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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.

The body is a strong, executable release-QA playbook: a clearly ordered automated gate sweep with stop-on-failure validation, three concrete manual QA targets tied to issue numbers, a reporting checklist, and red-flags guardrails. Its only soft spot is progressive disclosure — everything is inline in one ~115-line file with no external references to push detail down into. Conceptual padding is minimal.

Suggestions

Consider moving the verbose manual-QA-target scenarios (e.g. the #3289 Windows Terminal retest path) into a references/ file referenced one level deep, keeping the SKILL.md overview leaner.

Tighten the Red flags section into a shorter bullet list to trim the framing prose and lift conciseness toward a 5.

If the check-versions.sh or merge-tree details grow, extract them to scripts/ or references/ and signal them from the body to exercise the progressive-disclosure pattern.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is command-forward and assumes Claude's competence, with no padding explaining what a release or a gate is; only light purposeful framing prose ("No sweep, no 'done'") and a somewhat long red-flags list keep it from a clean 5. This matches the "efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed" anchor; it is not a 3 because it is not noticeably padded, and not a 5 because a few framing sentences could be tightened.

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides copy-paste-ready, executable commands covering the common cases ("cargo fmt --all --check", "npm test && npm run check:web", "cargo test -p ... --locked", "./target/release/codewhale --version", and a complete git merge-tree invocation). Placeholders like <release-branch> are justified template variables. This matches the top anchor for fully executable, copy-paste-ready guidance.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The automated sweep is a numbered 0-7 sequence run "in order" with explicit validation ("Stop on the first failure and report it", --locked reproducibility, a version-drift gate, and a binary smoke check), three manual QA targets are enumerated, and a reporting checklist closes the loop. For a release/publish operation this satisfies the destructive/batch validation requirement; this matches the top anchor with explicit validation steps and a checklist.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are referenced, so all content sits inline in a single SKILL.md that is well-sectioned (When to use, Automated gate sweep, Manual QA targets, Reporting format, Red flags). This matches the "good structure; minor organization gaps" anchor; it is not a 5 because the ~115-line body is somewhat long-inline with no signaled one-level-deep references to demonstrate the overview-plus-references pattern, and not a 3 because the structure is genuinely good rather than buried or poorly organized.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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.

The description is well-targeted: it pairs an explicit trigger (use before claiming release work is done) with two concrete actions and a clearly named, low-conflict niche. Its main weakness is keyword breadth — it relies on a single trigger phrasing without synonyms or common variants. Voice is imperative, avoiding first/second-person penalty.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger keywords with synonyms a user might say, e.g. "release-ready", "ship", "merge-ready", or "QA gate", so the skill surfaces for more phrasings.

Name one or two more concrete actions (e.g. verify version-drift gate, confirm manual TUI targets) to lift specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

Consider adding a short "Use when..." clause enumerating the distinct scenarios (release candidate verification, pre-publish boundary) to reinforce completeness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("Codewhale release work") and two concrete actions ("run the full gate sweep" and "list the manual QA targets"), matching the anchor that names a domain plus 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage. It is not a 4 because only two actions are named, and not a 2 because the actions are concrete rather than minimal or generic.

3 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the "when" via "Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done" and the "what" via "run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets", with a concrete trigger phrase. This matches the top anchor; it is not a 4 because the "when" is explicit and specific rather than merely present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrasing a user would say is present ("claiming Codewhale release work is done", "release work is complete"), but keyword coverage is narrow with no synonyms or variants like "release-ready", "ship", or "merge". This matches the anchor for some relevant keywords missing common variations; it is not a 4 because coverage is thin rather than good, and not a 2 because the terms are domain-specific and natural rather than generic.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves a clear niche tied to a named product's release QA ("Codewhale release work", "gate sweep", "manual QA targets") with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk. This matches the top anchor; it is not a 4 because the niche is clearly named and narrow rather than only "mostly distinct".

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Hmbown/Codewhale
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.