bitbucket-automation
Automate Bitbucket repositories, pull requests, branches, issues, and workspace management via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:Lingjie-chen/MT5 --skill bitbucket-automation70
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
50%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 effectively communicates specific Bitbucket automation capabilities and is clearly distinguishable from other VCS skills. However, it critically lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') which would help Claude know when to select this skill. The trigger terms are adequate but could include more natural variations users might say.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers like 'Use when the user asks about Bitbucket, needs to create PRs, manage Bitbucket repos, or work with Bitbucket workspaces'
Include common abbreviations and variations: 'PR', 'repo', 'merge request', 'code review', 'BB' to improve trigger term coverage
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'repositories, pull requests, branches, issues, and workspace management' - these are distinct, actionable capabilities within the Bitbucket domain. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly describes WHAT it does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for WHEN Claude should select this skill. The rubric states missing 'Use when' should cap completeness at 2, and this has no when guidance at all. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good keywords like 'Bitbucket', 'repositories', 'pull requests', 'branches', 'issues' that users would naturally say, but missing common variations like 'PR', 'repo', 'merge', 'code review', or 'BB'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clearly specific to Bitbucket platform with distinct triggers; unlikely to conflict with GitHub, GitLab, or other version control skills due to explicit 'Bitbucket' naming and 'Rube MCP (Composio)' implementation detail. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%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, highly actionable skill for Bitbucket automation with excellent workflow clarity and specific, executable guidance. The main weaknesses are moderate verbosity from repeated pitfall information across sections and a monolithic structure that could benefit from progressive disclosure through separate reference files. The comprehensive quick reference table and detailed parameter documentation make this immediately usable.
Suggestions
Consolidate pitfalls into a single section or inline them only where first relevant, removing the redundant 'Known Pitfalls' section that repeats information from workflow-specific pitfalls
Consider splitting into SKILL.md (overview + quick reference) and separate workflow files (PR_WORKFLOWS.md, ISSUE_WORKFLOWS.md, etc.) for better progressive disclosure
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is comprehensive but includes some redundancy - pitfalls are repeated across sections and in a dedicated 'Known Pitfalls' section. The quick reference table duplicates information already covered in workflows. Could be tightened by consolidating pitfalls and removing redundant parameter listings. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Excellent actionability with specific tool names, exact parameter names, concrete examples of BBQL syntax, and clear format requirements (e.g., UUID with curly braces, full SHA1 hashes). Every workflow provides copy-paste ready tool sequences with required vs optional steps clearly marked. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Workflows are clearly sequenced with numbered steps, explicit prerequisite/required/optional labels, and validation checkpoints (e.g., 'verify branch existence before PR creation', 'confirm connection status shows ACTIVE'). Destructive operations have explicit warnings and user confirmation requirements. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections, but everything is in a single monolithic file. The skill could benefit from splitting detailed workflow sections into separate files (e.g., PR_WORKFLOWS.md, ISSUE_WORKFLOWS.md) with SKILL.md serving as a concise overview with navigation links. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.