CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

conventional-commit

Add and commit changes using conventional commits

56

Quality

63%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.opencode/skills/conventional-commit/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, actionable commit skill with copy-paste commands and clear examples; the main gap is an explicit validation/feedback checkpoint for the risky commit operation.

Suggestions

Add an explicit pre-commit validation checkpoint (e.g. 'After staging, re-run git diff --staged to confirm no secrets before committing') with a fix-and-retry loop.

Trim the duplicated commit-format block and consolidate the type list to reduce redundancy.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and assumes Claude's git knowledge, but the type list and duplicated format/examples could be tightened and some phrasing restates obvious rules.

2 / 3

Actionability

It provides concrete, copy-paste-ready commands (git status, git diff, git log) and executable example commit messages with correct formatting.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Steps are clearly sequenced, but commit is a risky/batch operation and validation is implicit (warn on secrets, handle hook failures) rather than an explicit validate-then-proceed checkpoint with feedback loop.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

At ~86 lines with no external references needed, the well-organized sections (Context, Process, Commit Format, Examples, Rules, Execute) give clear single-level navigation appropriate to a simple skill.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 correctly identifies the skill's purpose in concise third-person voice, but omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and only lightly covers natural keyword variations.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to commit changes or write a conventional commit message.'

Expand trigger terms to include 'commit message', 'git commit', 'staged changes', and 'diff'.

List a couple more concrete actions (analyze the diff, determine type/scope) to lift specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a clear domain (conventional commits) and concrete actions (add and commit) but does not enumerate multiple specific actions like analyzing diffs, determining type/scope, or secret-checking.

2 / 3

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 2 per the rubric guidelines.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It surfaces natural terms a user would say ('commit', 'conventional commits'), but lacks common variations such as 'commit message', 'git commit', 'staged changes', or 'diff'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The conventional-commit niche is reasonably distinct, but the bare phrase could still overlap with a more generic git/commit skill absent explicit triggering context.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

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
LibPDF-js/core
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.