CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ci-flaky-patrol

Classify a bounded batch of stale PR CI failures and choose the safest response.

61

Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.qwen/skills/ci-flaky-patrol/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is highly actionable with a precise output contract and unambiguous decision rules, scoring well on actionability, workflow clarity, and organization. The only weakness is the verbose, over-emphasized flakyTest paragraph that could be tightened for token efficiency.

Suggestions

Split the dense flakyTest paragraph into a short rule plus a compact list (when to emit, required fields, length limits, ignore-on-malformed) to reduce repetition.

Replace redundant emphasis (e.g. 'ONLY ... NEVER ... so never drop a valid rerun over it') with a single concise statement of the rule and its exception.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and free of concept padding, but the flakyTest paragraph is a long, defensive run-on ("ONLY", "NEVER", repeated qualifications, "so never drop a valid rerun over it") that could be tightened without losing clarity.

2 / 3

Actionability

It gives an exact top-level JSON shape with a concrete example, per-action definitions, field length limits (200 chars), and an explicit tool restriction (only read_file and write_file), making the guidance copy-paste ready.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

As a single-purpose classification skill the action is unambiguous (choose exactly one action per candidate, return one decision per candidate), with clear copy-fields-exactly and confidence rules; validation is delegated to the driver and malformed flakyTest entries are handled gracefully.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single well-organized SKILL.md with clear sections (actions list, flakyTest rules, output shape, constraints) and no bundle files, so for a short self-contained skill progressive disclosure is satisfied by its organization alone.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 is specific to a clear, non-conflicting niche but is missing any explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness and trigger-term quality. It states the what well but never the when.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when triaging stale or flaky PR CI failures, deciding whether to rerun, comment, or skip them.'

Include common user phrasings like 'flaky CI', 'CI rerun', or 'PR checks failing' to improve trigger-term coverage.

Consider naming the concrete output (a decisions JSON file) so the capability reads as a specific action rather than an abstract 'choose the safest response'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a concrete domain ("stale PR CI failures") and two actions ("Classify" and "choose the safest response"), but stops at two rather than listing multiple specific concrete actions as the level-3 anchor requires.

2 / 3

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does, but the "when" is entirely missing with no "Use when..." trigger guidance, so per the rubric guideline completeness is capped at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes some natural terms a user might say ("CI failures", "PR") alongside technical phrasing ("bounded batch"), but lacks common variations and has no explicit trigger clause.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (triaging stale PR CI failures) is narrow and clearly distinguishable, making it unlikely to trigger for or conflict with unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
QwenLM/qwen-code
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.