CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

openspec-bulk-archive-change

Archive multiple completed changes at once. Use when archiving several parallel changes.

Quality

69%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./bcs-runtime/bcs-k8s/bcs-component/bcs-drplan-controller/.claude/skills/openspec-bulk-archive-change/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is openspec-bulk-archive-change in dwmkerr/git-workforest

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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 strong operational skill: the workflow is explicitly sequenced with batch validation, conflict detection, user confirmation, and per-change failure isolation, and the core commands are copy-paste ready. Its weaknesses are redundancy (output templates and guardrails duplicate the step content) and zero progressive disclosure — the long worked examples and output templates should live in a reference file. The deferred 'openspec-sync-specs approach' and vague 'search the codebase' step are the main actionability gaps.

Suggestions

Move the 'Conflict Resolution Examples' and the three output-template sections into a references/ file (e.g. references/examples.md) and link to it, keeping SKILL.md as a lean ~150-line workflow.

Delete the Guardrails entries that restate inline step instructions, and collapse the three 'Output On ...' sections into one parameterized template since step 9 already shows a filled-in example.

Make the two vague steps concrete: specify how to search for implementation evidence (e.g. grep for requirement-named functions/tests) and inline a short summary of the sync procedure instead of just naming 'the openspec-sync-specs approach'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The nine steps are dense and earn their tokens, but there is real duplication: step 9's summary example is repeated nearly verbatim in the 'Output On Success'/'Output On Partial Success' sections, and the Guardrails restate inline instructions ("Always prompt for selection, never auto-select" duplicates step 2's "IMPORTANT: Do NOT auto-select"). Mostly efficient but could be tightened by ~80 lines, matching anchor 3 rather than 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete and mostly executable: `openspec list --json`, `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`, the `mkdir -p`/`mv` archive commands, exact table and output formats. Minor gaps keep it below 5: "Search the codebase for implementation evidence" gives no concrete search method, and "Use the openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven intelligent merge)" defers to another skill without any inline detail.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 9-step workflow with explicit validation for a batch/destructive operation (step 3 batch validation, step 4 conflict detection, step 6 status table, step 7 user confirmation, step 8 per-change outcome tracking, and the guardrail "If archive target exists, fail that change but continue with others"), so the batch-operation cap at 3 does not apply. Not 5 because there is no post-archive verification or fix-and-retry feedback loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single file with no references/ directory, and the ~235-line body inlines auxiliary content that belongs in a reference file: the ~35-line 'Conflict Resolution Examples' section and the three separate output-template sections. Sections are well-organized and navigable, but content that should be separate is inline, matching anchor 3.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 correctly answers both 'what' and 'when' with a proper third-person 'Use when' clause, but it is thin: it covers only one of the skill's several actions, misses natural trigger terms like 'bulk'/'batch'/'openspec', and its 'when' clause largely restates the 'what'. It is serviceable but below the bar set by the reference good examples.

Suggestions

Enumerate the skill's concrete actions, e.g. 'Archives multiple completed openspec changes at once, detects delta-spec conflicts between them, resolves conflicts by checking the codebase, and syncs specs before archiving.'

Add natural trigger phrasing users would actually say, such as 'Use when the user wants to bulk archive, batch archive, or archive several/multiple completed changes at once.'

Mention 'openspec' (or 'changes' in the openspec sense) explicitly to reduce conflict risk with generic archive or single-change archive skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Archive multiple completed changes at once" names the domain and one concrete action, but omits other capabilities the skill performs (spec conflict detection, codebase-based resolution, spec syncing). Closest to the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; not 4 because several specific actions are unlisted.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: what = "Archive multiple completed changes at once", when = an explicit "Use when archiving several parallel changes" clause. Not 5 because the 'when' clause restates the 'what' rather than adding distinct concrete trigger phrases, matching "'when' could be more explicit or specific".

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes "archiving", "completed changes", and variations like "several parallel changes", but misses the most natural phrasings "bulk" and "batch" (the skill name itself is "bulk archive") plus any tool-specific terms like "openspec". Fits 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' better than the good-coverage anchor at 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"changes" is generic without any mention of openspec, so the description could overlap with a single-archive counterpart skill or generic archive/cleanup skills. "Somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills" is the best fit; not 4 given the unqualified term 'changes'.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

TencentBlueKing/bk-bcs

Path

bcs-runtime/bcs-k8s/bcs-component/bcs-drplan-controller/.claude/skills/openspec-bulk-archive-change/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.