maple-otel-spec-review

Review a diff, PR, or specific file in this repo for OpenTelemetry *specification* compliance, grounded in the source-linked spec corpus at docs/otel-spec/ (snapshot v1.58.0). Triggers on requests like 'is this spec compliant', 'review this PR against the OTel spec', 'spec-review this diff', 'check my partial-success handling', 'are these retryable status codes right', 'does apps/ingest honor the OTLP spec', and on reviews of changes touching the OTLP server surface in apps/ingest (partial success, retryable set {429, 502, 503, 504}, protobuf Status bodies, gzip, OTLP/JSON encoding), self-instrumentation (apps/api tracer setup, apps/ingest/src/otel.rs, packages/effect-sdk), or consumers of span status / SeverityNumber / db.query.text (WarehouseQueryService, query-engine). Spec MUSTs and SHOULDs only — for Maple house conventions use maple-telemetry-conventions; for whole-project instrumentation audits use maple-audit; for general diff correctness use /code-review.

Quality

98%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

96%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.

A well-structured, actionable review workflow with explicit validation checkpoints and clean progressive disclosure through a routing table and cached MUSTs. The only minor weakness is slight repetition of skill-disambiguation wording between the description and the body intro.

Suggestions

Trim the re-statement of maple-audit / maple-telemetry-conventions / /code-review disambiguation in the body intro, since the description already covers it; keep only the corpus-authority point.

The routing table is large; consider moving the long 'Diff touches' rows into a referenced doc and keeping only the surface-summary rows inline, reducing token load for trivial reviews that the quick table already resolves.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Dense and information-rich with no concept over-explanation (it assumes Claude knows OTel); tables and routing are lean for their coverage. A few minor trims are possible — the body re-states the maple-audit/maple-telemetry-conventions/code-review disambiguation already in the description — keeping it just below the lean-5 bar.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete executable commands throughout — `Grep -n '^##' docs/otel-spec/<file>.md`, `Read` with offset/limit, `git diff`/`git show <sha>`, `bun typecheck`, `cargo check` — plus a copy-paste findings-report template and a classification example, covering the common review cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: classify-and-show-before-review (Step 2), load minimally (Step 3), report-before-edit (Step 5), and a fix-then-reverify-build feedback loop in Step 6 ('A fix that breaks the build is a regression — fix or revert it').	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	SKILL.md acts as a routing hub + quick-cache table that defers detail to the repo spec corpus (docs/otel-spec/*.md) loaded section-scoped via a one-level-deep, clearly signaled loading rule and routing table — appropriate content split with easy navigation. No in-skill bundle files exist to traverse.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

100%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.

A highly specific, third-person description with explicit trigger phrases and clear disambiguation from neighboring skills. It comprehensively answers both what the skill does and when to invoke it.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (OpenTelemetry spec compliance review of a diff/PR/file) and lists multiple concrete, specific surfaces — partial success, the exact retryable set {429, 502, 503, 504}, protobuf Status bodies, gzip, OTLP/JSON encoding, tracer setup, SeverityNumber, db.query.text — giving comprehensive concrete coverage.	5 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (review a diff/PR/file for OTel specification compliance, grounded in the docs/otel-spec corpus) and 'when' via an explicit 'Triggers on requests like ...' clause plus path/content signals, with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural verbatim trigger phrases users would actually say — 'is this spec compliant', 'review this PR against the OTel spec', 'spec-review this diff', 'check my partial-success handling', 'are these retryable status codes right', 'does apps/ingest honor the OTLP spec' — covering synonyms and concrete path-based triggers.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (OTel spec MUST/SHOULD compliance) and explicitly disambiguates from adjacent skills — maple-telemetry-conventions, maple-audit, and /code-review — minimizing wrong-skill triggering.	5 / 5
	Total	20 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: MapleTechLabs/maple
Path: skills/maple-otel-spec-review/SKILL.md
Commit: 3cb9193

Reviewed: 1 day 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.