CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

rm-sentry-issue-fixer

Find and fix issues from Sentry. Use when asked to fix Sentry errors, debug production issues, investigate exceptions, or resolve bugs reported in Sentry. Methodically analyzes stack traces, breadcrumbs, traces, and context to identify root causes.

Quality

94%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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.

This is a highly actionable, well-sequenced operational skill: concrete commands with validation checkpoints and error recovery throughout, plus unusually strong prompt-injection and data-hygiene constraints for untrusted Sentry data. The main costs are a monolithic ~330-line body and some repeated security reminders that could be consolidated or moved to reference files.

Suggestions

Consolidate the untrusted-data guidance into the Security Constraints section and reference it once from Phase 2 and the test guidance instead of restating it three times.

Move the Quick Reference MCP tool catalog and Common Patterns table into a references/ file (e.g. references/mcp-and-patterns.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview, and deduplicate the Phase 1 MCP table against it.

Fix the malformed table in Phase 6 (the Evidence/Regression/Completeness rows lack a header separator row) and the stray <br/> in the Phase 5 table so both render correctly.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense with operational specifics Claude could not guess (exact CLI flags, jq extraction recipes, exit codes, output JSON shapes), but the untrusted-data warning is repeated three times (Security Constraints table, Phase 2 reminder, test-data guidance) and the Quick Reference MCP list partially duplicates Phase 1's MCP table. Not 5 because of this trimmable repetition; not 3 because virtually nothing explains concepts Claude already knows.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every phase ships copy-paste-ready commands with full arguments, the helper scripts' JSON outputs are shown verbatim, and failure handling is executable (exit codes 2/3 → "re-run with corrected inputs rather than hand-assembling"). Concrete examples cover the common cases including the already-fixed and Linear-not-configured paths.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Phases 1–7 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates ("Do not proceed to Phase 5 until you have explicitly ruled out…", Phase 5 repo cross-reference, Phase 6 pre-fix checklist) and feedback loops (script non-zero exit → correct inputs and re-run; Linear state failure → warn and continue). Git push is guarded by dynamic default-branch detection and a hard no-force-push rule, so the risky operations are validated.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and all four referenced scripts (sentry-api.sh, linear-api.sh, make-branch-names.sh, detect-default-branch.sh) exist in the bundle and are invoked by exact path, one level deep. Not 5 because the ~330-line body inlines content that could live in reference files (MCP tool catalog, common-error patterns table, Linear integration detail), keeping SKILL.md a monolithic manual rather than an overview.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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 is a model example: it states concrete capabilities in third person, includes an explicit 'Use when' clause with multiple natural trigger phrasings, and is tightly scoped to Sentry. No vague or padded language is present.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions covering the full workflow — "Find and fix issues from Sentry", "analyzes stack traces, breadcrumbs, traces, and context to identify root causes" — with no generic filler. Coverage spans discovery, analysis, and fixing, matching the comprehensive anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor at 4.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Find and fix issues from Sentry… analyzes stack traces, breadcrumbs, traces, and context to identify root causes") and when ("Use when asked to fix Sentry errors, debug production issues, investigate exceptions, or resolve bugs reported in Sentry") with concrete trigger phrases — the exact anchor-5 pattern.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would actually say: "fix Sentry errors", "debug production issues", "investigate exceptions", "resolve bugs reported in Sentry". The verb (fix/debug/investigate/resolve) × noun (errors/exceptions/bugs/issues) coverage gives comprehensive synonym coverage for the domain.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Sentry is a clear niche with distinct, product-specific triggers; the description would not plausibly fire for a non-Sentry debugging or bug-fixing skill. Minimal conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

RoleModel/rolemodel-skills

Path

skills/rm-sentry-issue-fixer/SKILL.md

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.