publish

Publish Seed specification as GitHub Issues for team-based project management

Quality

63%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude-plugin/skills/publish/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

72%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.

The skill is highly actionable with executable gh commands and a clearly sequenced 8-step workflow including useful confirmation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are the absence of a batch error-recovery/verification feedback loop (capping workflow clarity) and the lack of any progressive file structure, with large templates inlined rather than referenced.

Suggestions

Add an error-recovery and verification loop for the batch issue creation in Step 7 (e.g. what to do if a gh issue create fails mid-batch, and a final check that all task numbers were captured and linked), which would lift workflow clarity above the batch cap of 3.

Move the large Epic and Task heredoc body templates into reference files under references/ (e.g. references/epic_template.md, references/task_template.md) and link to them, reducing token load and improving progressive disclosure.

Trim the repeated '-R <TARGET_REPO>' reminders (stated at Steps 4, 5, and 7) to a single authoritative note, since the instruction is already emphasized once.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is operational throughout (commands, heredoc templates, JSON prompts) with no padding of concepts Claude already knows, though the repeated -R reminders and full inlined Epic/Task templates are minor trim opportunities.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready gh commands with concrete flags (auth status, label create, issue create with heredoc bodies, grep-based issue-number extraction) covering the common end-to-end cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1-8 are well sequenced with prereq/duplicate/plan checkpoints, but this is a batch operation with no error-recovery feedback loop for partial gh failures and no post-creation verification, so workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the batch-operations rule.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and the bulky Epic/Task heredoc body templates that belong in a reference file are fully inlined in a ~350-line monolith; section structure is present but content is not split across files.	3 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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.

The description clearly states what the skill does but omits any explicit 'when to use it' trigger guidance, which limits completeness and trigger-term quality. It is reasonably specific and distinctive for the Ouroboros Seed-to-issues niche.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause with natural trigger phrases (e.g. 'Use when converting a Seed spec into GitHub Issues, or when the user asks to publish a seed / create issues from a seed') to raise completeness and trigger-term quality.

Include one or two more concrete actions (e.g. 'creates an Epic with linked Task issues and applies labels') to broaden specificity beyond the single 'publish' verb.

Add common synonyms/file cues (e.g. 'GitHub Issues', 'epics', 'seed to issues') to improve natural keyword coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the specific transformation ('Publish Seed specification as GitHub Issues') but describes only one concrete action with no mention of Epic/Task breakdown, labels, or duplicate checks, so it is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear (publish a Seed spec as GitHub Issues for team PM) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance in the description, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains the relevant terms 'Seed specification' and 'GitHub Issues' but lacks the natural user phrasings (e.g. 'create issues', 'publish to github') and synonyms that appear only in the body, not the description.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Seed-to-GitHub-Issues niche is mostly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against general GitHub-issue tooling; it is more specific than a score-3 'could still overlap' anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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: Q00/ouroboros
Path: .claude-plugin/skills/publish/SKILL.md
Commit: c801447

Reviewed: about 1 hour 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.