gh-workflow-monitor

Monitor GitHub workflows, propose fixes for failures, and report status

Quality

27%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/gh-workflow-monitor/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

22%

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

This skill is essentially a high-level outline with no actionable content. It lists steps at a conceptual level without providing any concrete gh CLI commands, example outputs, error handling patterns, or validation checkpoints. Claude would need to infer nearly everything about how to actually perform these tasks.

Suggestions

Add concrete `gh` CLI commands for each step, e.g., `gh run list --branch $(git branch --show-current)`, `gh run view <run-id> --log-failed`, etc.

Include example output parsing to show how to identify failure reasons and determine which workflow/job failed.

Add a validation/feedback loop: after proposing a fix, describe how to verify the fix (e.g., push and re-monitor the workflow run, check logs again).

Define what 'propose a fix' means concretely—should Claude edit files, create a commit, open a PR? Provide specific guidance on the expected actions and output format.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is relatively short and doesn't over-explain concepts Claude knows, but the step descriptions are vague filler rather than substantive instructions—they take up tokens without adding real value.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides no concrete commands, code examples, or specific gh CLI invocations. Each step is a vague directive ('find the workflow run', 'propose a fix') with no executable guidance on how to accomplish it.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	While steps are numbered, they lack specifics on what commands to run, how to identify failures, what constitutes a valid fix, and there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops for error recovery.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is short and not a monolithic wall of text, but there are no references to supporting files and no structured navigation. For a skill this simple it could score higher, but the lack of any concrete detail means there's nothing to organize well.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Description

32%

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 provides a basic overview of the skill's purpose around GitHub workflow monitoring and fixing, but lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and misses important natural keywords like 'GitHub Actions', 'CI/CD', 'pipeline', or 'build failure'. It would benefit from more concrete action descriptions and explicit selection criteria.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'GitHub Actions', 'CI/CD pipeline failed', 'workflow run', 'build failure', or 'check why CI failed'.

List more specific concrete actions such as 'analyze workflow run logs', 'identify failing steps', 'suggest YAML configuration fixes', or 'retry failed jobs'.

Include common file/technology references like '.github/workflows', 'Actions YAML', or 'CI logs' to improve distinctiveness and trigger matching.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (GitHub workflows) and lists some actions (monitor, propose fixes, report status), but these are fairly high-level and not deeply specific about concrete capabilities like parsing logs, retrying jobs, or analyzing error messages.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what the skill does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and since the 'what' is also somewhat thin, this scores a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes 'GitHub workflows' and 'failures' which are relevant keywords, but misses common variations users might say like 'CI/CD', 'pipeline', 'GitHub Actions', 'build failed', 'CI failure', or 'workflow run'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Mentioning 'GitHub workflows' provides some specificity, but 'monitor', 'propose fixes', and 'report status' are generic enough that this could overlap with general GitHub skills, CI/CD tools, or debugging skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: PaloAltoNetworks/shifter
Commit: 23f9d1d

Reviewed: 24 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.