git-commit

Generate well-formatted git commit messages following conventional commit standards

Quality

62%

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 ./resources/skills/git-commit/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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 body is a compact, well-structured instruction skill with concrete commands and precise formatting rules, and its workflow includes a user-confirmation checkpoint. Its main weaknesses are re-teaching conventional commit types Claude already knows and the absence of worked commit-message examples.

Suggestions

Trim or compress the Types list (e.g., only the non-obvious ones or a one-line reminder) since Claude already knows the Conventional Commits taxonomy.

Add one or two worked examples (staged diff → final commit message) to make guidance fully copy-paste ready and lift actionability to 5.

Add a brief note for edge cases in the workflow, such as an empty staged diff or a commit message exceeding length limits, to strengthen validation coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient (short sections, terse bullets), but the Conventional Commits format template and the full 10-item Types list restate standard knowledge Claude already has. This matches 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation' rather than the lean anchor at 5 or the noticeably-verbose anchor at 2.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete guidance throughout: exact commands ("git diff --staged", "git commit -m \"message\""), precise limits ("Limit to 50 characters", "Wrap at 72 characters"), and concrete footer tokens ("Fixes #123", "BREAKING CHANGE: description"). It falls short of 5 only because there are no worked example messages (input change → output commit), which the rubric's good example shows.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 4-step workflow (inspect staged changes → analyze → generate → "Optionally run git commit -m ... if user confirms") is a clear sequence with an explicit confirmation checkpoint. Not 5 because there is no validation/error-recovery loop (e.g., what to do with an empty diff or a rejected commit), though commit is neither destructive nor batch so no cap applies.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	This is a short (~52 lines), single-purpose skill with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist) and no external references needed. Per the simple-skill guideline, well-organized sections (Format, Types, Guidelines, Workflow) earn a 5.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 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 states a clear, concrete capability in the commit-message domain, but it completely lacks a 'when to use' trigger clause and misses several natural phrasings users would say. Adding an explicit usage trigger and natural synonyms would lift completeness and trigger-term quality to the top anchors.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g., "Use when the user asks to write, draft, or improve a commit message, or wants to commit staged changes."

Include natural trigger synonyms users actually say: "commit message", "write a commit", "draft commit", "git commit", "conventional commits".

Optionally name a second concrete action (e.g., "analyzes staged git diffs") to broaden capability coverage and sharpen distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Generate well-formatted git commit messages following conventional commit standards" names the domain and one concrete action (generate commit messages per conventional commits), matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor. It is not a 4 because only a single action verb is offered with no secondary capabilities (e.g., analyzing diffs or suggesting types).	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated (generate well-formatted conventional commit messages) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. It is not a 2 because the 'what' is concrete, not vague.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Keywords present are "git commit messages" and "conventional commit standards", but common natural phrasings users actually say — "write a commit message", "draft a commit", "commit my changes" — are absent. This matches 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than the good-coverage anchor at 4.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The commit-message niche is fairly distinct with clear triggers around commit message generation; only minor overlap risk with a general git-helper or code-review skill. Not 5 because "git commit messages" could co-trigger with broader git workflow skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: ThinkInAIXYZ/deepchat
Path: resources/skills/git-commit/SKILL.md
Commit: 0fb8c2c

Reviewed: 2 days 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.