freshservice-automation

Automate Freshservice ITSM tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): create/update tickets, bulk operations, service requests, and outbound emails. Always search tools first for current schemas.

1.43x

Quality

58%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

92%

1.43x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.trae/skills/freshservice-automation/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

67%

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 strong in specificity and distinctiveness, clearly naming the platform (Freshservice) and concrete actions (create/update tickets, bulk operations, service requests, outbound emails). However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause which caps completeness, and the trigger terms could be improved by including more natural user language variations beyond the technical tool names.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Freshservice tickets, IT helpdesk tasks, incident management, or service desk operations.'

Include more natural user-facing trigger terms like 'helpdesk', 'incident', 'IT support ticket', 'service desk', or 'ITSM workflow' to improve discoverability.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: create/update tickets, bulk operations, service requests, and outbound emails. Also mentions searching tools for current schemas.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers 'what does this do' with specific actions, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The when is only implied by the nature of the tasks listed.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'Freshservice', 'ITSM', 'tickets', 'service requests', 'bulk operations', and 'outbound emails', but misses common user variations like 'helpdesk', 'incident', 'IT support', or 'ticket management'. The mention of 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is technical jargon unlikely to be used by end users.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Very distinct niche targeting Freshservice specifically via Rube MCP/Composio. Unlikely to conflict with other skills due to the specific platform and tooling mentioned.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Implementation

50%

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

This is a competent skill that clearly documents Freshservice API operations with good parameter documentation and pitfall warnings. However, it suffers from content redundancy (status/priority codes and pitfalls repeated multiple times), lacks executable example payloads for tool calls, and is missing validation/feedback loops for the bulk update workflow which is a destructive batch operation.

Suggestions

Add concrete, copy-paste ready tool call examples with actual JSON payloads for at least the create ticket and bulk update workflows

Add explicit validation steps to the bulk update workflow: preview the ticket list before updating, verify results after, and define a retry/rollback strategy for partial failures

Consolidate status/priority code references into a single location (the reference tables) and remove the inline repetitions in each workflow section to reduce redundancy

Consider moving the detailed parameter lists and pitfalls into a separate REFERENCE.md file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with tool sequences and key gotchas only

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is reasonably well-structured but includes some redundancy — status/priority codes are repeated in individual workflow sections AND in a separate reference table, and pitfalls are listed per-workflow AND again in a consolidated 'Known Pitfalls' section. The quick reference table at the end is useful but some content could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	Tool names and parameters are clearly specified with concrete values, but there are no executable code examples or copy-paste ready tool invocations. The 'Finding Tickets by Date Range' example uses pseudocode-style numbered steps rather than actual tool call syntax. Key parameters are well-documented but lack concrete example payloads.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Multi-step workflows are clearly sequenced with labeled steps (Required/Optional/Prerequisite), but the bulk update workflow — a potentially destructive batch operation — lacks explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., confirming ticket list before updating, verifying results after). No feedback loops for error recovery are defined despite the skill noting that individual updates in a bulk operation can fail.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is well-organized with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's quite long (~180 lines) with all content inline. The repeated status/priority tables and consolidated pitfalls section could be split into a reference file. The link to Composio toolkit docs is good but there are no other references to supplementary files.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

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

Repository: Lingjie-chen/MT5
Commit: 3069d33

Reviewed: 26 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.