Content
88%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-structured triage workflow with executable commands, explicit validation checkpoints, and non-obvious domain judgment. It is slightly long for a single self-contained file, which is the main improvement lever.
Suggestions
Move the detailed gate mechanics ('How the gate works' section) into a references/ file, leaving SKILL.md as an overview that points to it — this would tighten conciseness and lift progressive_disclosure.
Trim the emphatic restatements in Step 3 ('That is a cursory review and it produces wrong verdicts... You cannot assess a PR without reading the code it changes in context') to a single crisp statement of the anti-pattern.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Largely efficient and assumes GitHub/git competence, focusing on non-obvious domain judgment (the MRE-vs-contract distinction, gate mechanics) rather than concepts Claude already knows; minor emphatic repetition ('a cursory review... it produces wrong verdicts') could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Copy-paste-ready gh commands with placeholders throughout — gh issue view/list, gh pr view/comments, gh api users, gh search prs, gh issue edit --add-assignee, gh issue comment --body-file — covering the common triage cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–5 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation and feedback loops: verify the assignment check clears and reopens the PR (inspect the run if not), a stop-and-decline checkpoint at Step 2, and authorization gating before destructive public actions. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear section headers and a one-level reference to require-issue-link.yml, but the ~195-line single-file body has no bundle files to offload detail into, and some gate mechanics could be split into a reference file. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |