pr-manual-testing
Generate Gherkin-format manual testing steps from code changes for pull request descriptions. Use when the user asks for manual testing steps, Gherkin test scenarios, or QA steps 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 concisely communicates a specific capability with clear trigger conditions. It uses third person voice, lists concrete actions, and includes an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger terms. The description is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with related skills while being comprehensive enough for accurate skill selection.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description lists a specific concrete action: 'Generate Gherkin-format manual testing steps from code changes for pull request descriptions.' This clearly describes what the skill does with a specific output format (Gherkin), input (code changes), and context (pull request descriptions). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (generate Gherkin-format manual testing steps from code changes for PR descriptions) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause with three trigger scenarios: manual testing steps, Gherkin test scenarios, or QA steps for a PR). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms: 'manual testing steps', 'Gherkin test scenarios', 'QA steps', 'PR'. These cover the main variations a user would naturally use when requesting this type of output. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: Gherkin-format manual testing steps specifically for PRs. The combination of Gherkin format, manual testing, and PR context makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills like general testing, code review, or PR description 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 skill that provides clear, actionable Gherkin-format guidance with excellent examples at varying complexity levels. Its main weakness is the lack of a validation checkpoint in the workflow — there's no step to verify scenario coverage against the actual diff or to review for completeness. Overall, it's concise, well-organized, and immediately usable.
Suggestions
Add a validation step to the workflow, e.g., '5. Review: verify each user-facing change in the diff has at least one corresponding Scenario' to create a feedback loop for completeness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every section earns its place. The keyword definitions are brief and necessary (Gherkin syntax isn't something Claude inherently knows in this project-specific context). No padding or unnecessary explanation of obvious concepts. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides a concrete workflow (git diff, identify changes, write scenarios), a copy-paste-ready template, and three progressively complex executable Gherkin examples covering single scenario, multiple scenarios with background, and data tables. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 4-step process is clear and sequenced, but there are no validation or verification checkpoints — e.g., no step to verify scenarios cover all changed behaviors, no review checklist, and no feedback loop for ensuring completeness against the diff. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-structured with clear sections (Format, Steps, Template, Examples, Reference). The reference to a sample feature file for advanced patterns is a clean one-level-deep pointer. For a skill of this size and scope, the organization is appropriate. | 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
d8db24a
- 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.