pr-codeowners
Identify code owners for changed files and map them to Slack group handles. Use when the user asks who owns changed files, which teams to tag for review, or to find code owners for a PR.
95
93%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 well-crafted skill description that clearly communicates both what the skill does and when to use it. It uses specific, natural trigger terms that developers would use and occupies a distinct niche combining code ownership identification with Slack handle mapping. The description is concise without being vague.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Identify code owners for changed files' and 'map them to Slack group handles'. These are clear, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Identify code owners for changed files and map them to Slack group handles') and when ('Use when the user asks who owns changed files, which teams to tag for review, or to find code owners for a PR'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'code owners', 'changed files', 'teams to tag', 'review', 'PR', 'Slack group handles'. Good coverage of terms a developer would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche combining code ownership with Slack handle mapping. The specific mention of CODEOWNERS, Slack groups, and PR review context makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
87%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-crafted, focused skill that efficiently communicates a clear workflow with a valuable reference lookup table. Its main strength is conciseness and actionability — it provides exactly the information Claude needs without over-explaining. The only notable gap is the lack of edge case handling (missing CODEOWNERS file, no changed files, ambiguous pattern matches), which slightly weakens workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add a brief note about edge cases: what to do if CODEOWNERS file doesn't exist or if git diff returns no changed files
Consider adding a brief example of CODEOWNERS pattern matching (e.g., how glob patterns like `/app/core/**` map to teams) since pattern matching rules can be nuanced
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every token earns its place. The skill assumes Claude knows how to parse CODEOWNERS patterns, work with git, and process tables. No unnecessary explanations of concepts like what CODEOWNERS is or how git diff works. The lookup table is pure reference data that Claude cannot infer. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides an executable git command, a concrete matching strategy against CODEOWNERS patterns, a complete lookup table for mapping, and a clear fallback rule with specific default handle. The output format is explicitly specified. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four steps are clearly sequenced and logical. However, there are no validation checkpoints — for example, no step to verify the CODEOWNERS file exists, no handling for when git diff returns no files, and no verification that the pattern matching produced correct results. For a non-destructive read-only operation this is less critical, but the workflow could still benefit from edge case handling. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this size and scope (single-purpose, under 50 lines of meaningful content), the structure is well-organized with clear sections: Steps, Lookup table, and Output. No external references are needed, and the content is appropriately self-contained. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- MetaMask/metamask-mobile
- Commit
dedb5dd
- 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.