CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

what-happened

Explain why code looks the way it does by tracing the latest change for a file range or pasted snippet through `git blame` and deduplicated `entire explain` lookups. Use when the user asks what happened, says "tell me why" about a code block, is confused about a section of code, asks "wtf is going on", "why is this like this", "why was this changed", or wants provenance for a specific file block.

72

Quality

88%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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.

A highly actionable, well-sequenced skill body with concrete commands and strong validation checkpoints. Its main weakness is conciseness — repeated header rules and a verbose seven-variant response template could be tightened, and some material could be offloaded to a reference file.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated `Entire What Happened:` header rule into one authoritative statement instead of restating it across the intro, Rules, Workflow step 1, and Response format.

Trim the seven-variant match template to a representative subset plus a one-line note that other Rule 7 statuses follow the same shape, reducing the response-format wall of text.

Move the full trigger-phrase list (and optionally the detailed checkpoint-state matrix from Rule 7) into a `references/` file referenced once, to shorten the core SKILL.md and improve progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense procedural guidance with no padding of basics Claude already knows, but it is long with real repetition — the header/`Entire What Happened:` rule is restated across the intro, Rules, Workflow, and Response format, and the seven-variant match template plus the Backstreet-Boys-lyric warning could be tightened. It is not a 4 because the redundancy is more than minor, and not a 2 because it never bloats into explaining known concepts.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides exact, copy-paste-ready commands (`git blame --porcelain -L <start>,<end>`, `entire explain --commit <sha> --no-pager`, `grep -n -F`) and a concrete response-format template covering common status cases. It is not a 4 because the guidance is fully executable with specific examples rather than having minor gaps.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Sequences a clear four-step process (Resolve → Gather provenance → Explain → Fallback) with explicit validation checkpoints: stop on unresolved input, stop before `entire explain` when >5 unique commits, fallback on failed lookups, and seven explicitly distinguished states. It is not a 4 because feedback loops (failed `--full` → fallback, snippet-not-found → stop) are explicit rather than merely present.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets absent) and the body is one ~320-line file, but it is well-organized into Goal, Rules, Workflow, Response format, and Trigger phrases sections with no nested references. It is not a 5 because the long inline response template and trigger-phrase list could arguably live in a reference file, and not a 3 because the structure is genuinely clear and easy to navigate.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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.

A strong, specific description that clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with excellent natural trigger phrases. The only weakness is minor overlap risk with the related `explain` skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete actions — "tracing the latest change for a file range or pasted snippet through `git blame` and deduplicated `entire explain` lookups" — covering the mechanisms comprehensively for this niche. It is not a 4 because the actions fully cover what the skill does rather than leaving minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Explain why code looks the way it does by tracing the latest change...") and when ("Use when the user asks what happened...") with concrete trigger phrases. It is not a 4 because the 'when' is fully explicit rather than only loosely specified.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users actually say — "what happened", "tell me why", "wtf is going on", "why is this like this", "why was this changed", "provenance for a specific file block" — with strong synonym coverage. It is not a 4 because the natural-language trigger set is comprehensive rather than missing a few terms.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (latest-change provenance on a specific block via git blame + entire explain) with distinct triggers, but there is minor overlap risk with the closely related `explain` skill for broad original-intent questions. It is not a 5 because that related-skill overlap is real, and not a 3 because the scope is narrowly tied to a specific file block rather than broadly overlapping.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

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
SnowingFox/ai-skills
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.