common-git-collaboration
Enforce version control best practices for commits, branching, pull requests, and repository security. Use when writing commits, creating branches, merging, or opening pull requests.
80
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.github/skills/common/common-git-collaboration/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description that clearly communicates both what the skill does and when to use it, with good trigger term coverage. Its main weakness is the lack of specificity about what concrete actions or practices it enforces — 'enforce best practices' is somewhat vague. The broad scope across multiple version control activities could also create overlap with more specialized skills.
Suggestions
Replace 'enforce version control best practices' with specific actions, e.g., 'Formats conventional commit messages, enforces branch naming conventions, generates PR descriptions, and checks for secrets in commits.'
Consider narrowing scope or adding distinguishing details to reduce potential overlap with other git/PR-related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (version control) and lists several areas (commits, branching, pull requests, repository security), but doesn't describe specific concrete actions beyond 'enforce best practices' — it doesn't say what those practices are (e.g., conventional commit format, branch naming conventions, PR templates). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (enforce version control best practices for commits, branching, PRs, and repo security) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when writing commits, creating branches, merging, or opening pull requests'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'commits', 'branching', 'pull requests', 'merging', 'version control', 'repository security'. These cover common variations of how users would describe these tasks. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it targets version control specifically, the broad scope covering commits, branching, PRs, and security could overlap with more specialized skills (e.g., a commit message skill, a PR review skill, or a security-focused skill). The term 'best practices' is also somewhat generic. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, concise skill that covers version control best practices across commits, branching, PRs, and security. Its main weakness is the lack of executable examples (actual git commands) and missing validation checkpoints in workflows, which would make it more actionable for Claude to follow precisely.
Suggestions
Add executable git command examples for key workflows (e.g., `git checkout -b feat/my-feature`, `git rebase -i HEAD~3`, `git tag -a v1.2.0 -m 'Release 1.2.0'`) to improve actionability.
Add a validation checkpoint for the secrets protection workflow, such as a pre-commit hook example or a `git diff --cached` check command to verify no secrets are staged before committing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient. Every bullet point conveys actionable information without explaining concepts Claude already knows (e.g., no explanation of what Git is, what branches are, etc.). No padding or unnecessary context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The guidance is specific and concrete (naming conventions, commit format, line limits for PRs, specific tools like husky/lefthook), but lacks executable code examples. For instance, no actual git commands are shown for rebasing, squashing, or branch creation workflows. The commit format is well-specified but most instructions are directive rather than copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are organized into logical sections (commits, branches, PRs, secrets) but lack explicit sequencing and validation checkpoints. For example, the branch workflow doesn't specify a clear sequence from creation to merge, and there's no validation/verification step for checking secrets before committing or confirming rebase success. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill provides a clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references to implementation examples and clean history guides. Content is appropriately split between the main skill file and reference documents, with clear navigation links. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard
- Commit
4c72e76
- 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.