CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

github-pr-workflow

Working with GitHub Pull Requests using the gh CLI. Use for fetching PR details, review comments, CI status, and understanding the difference between PR-level comments vs inline code review comments.

90

1.06x
Quality

89%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

85%

1.06x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

79%

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

This is a well-crafted, concise skill that effectively communicates the critical distinction between PR comment types and provides actionable CLI commands and API endpoints. Its main weaknesses are the truncated workflow section at the end and the lack of reference to where the gh-pr-info script lives. The content is otherwise efficient and practical.

Suggestions

Complete the truncated 'Workflow: Addressing Review Comments' section with all steps including validation (e.g., re-running gh-pr-info after fixes to verify comments are resolved, running checks again).

Reference the location/path of the gh-pr-info script so Claude knows where to find it or verify it exists.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is lean and efficient. It doesn't explain what GitHub PRs are or how git works. Every section provides information Claude wouldn't inherently know, particularly the critical distinction between PR-level and inline review comments, and the script's filtering behavior.

3 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable commands throughout — real gh CLI commands, API endpoint patterns, and a clear script invocation syntax. The commands are copy-paste ready with clear placeholder conventions (<PR>, OWNER/REPO).

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 'Workflow: Addressing Review Comments' section at the end is truncated after only 2 steps, leaving the workflow incomplete. While the commands section is well-organized, the multi-step review-addressing workflow lacks validation checkpoints (e.g., verifying fixes resolve the comments, re-running checks).

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is well-structured with clear sections and a useful table for scripts, but it references a script (gh-pr-info) without linking to its source or documentation. No bundle files are provided, so we can't verify the script exists. The content is appropriately sized for a single file but could benefit from referencing the script's location.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is a strong description that clearly identifies the skill's domain (GitHub PRs via gh CLI), lists specific capabilities, and provides explicit usage triggers. The mention of the distinction between PR-level comments and inline code review comments adds valuable specificity. Minor improvement could be made by including file extension or additional synonyms, but overall it performs well across all dimensions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: fetching PR details, review comments, CI status, and distinguishes between PR-level comments vs inline code review comments.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both what ('fetching PR details, review comments, CI status, understanding comment types') and when ('Use for fetching PR details, review comments, CI status') with explicit trigger guidance.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'GitHub', 'Pull Requests', 'PR', 'gh CLI', 'review comments', 'CI status', 'code review'. These cover common variations of how users refer to PR workflows.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive — scoped specifically to GitHub Pull Requests via the gh CLI, with clear niche triggers like 'PR details', 'CI status', 'inline code review comments' that are unlikely to conflict with other skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
YPares/agent-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.