CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

clickup-automation

Automate ClickUp project management including tasks, spaces, folders, lists, comments, and team operations via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.

Quality

71%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/clickup-automation/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%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 dense, highly actionable reference whose tool sequences and parameter quirks are excellent, but it is hampered by cross-section redundancy, a missing pre-deletion validation step for destructive/batch operations, and an all-inline structure with no reference files. Tightening the duplicate pitfalls, adding a verify-before-delete checkpoint, and splitting the quick-reference table into a references file would raise most dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation checkpoint before CLICKUP_DELETE_TASK and before bulk/batch operations (e.g., GET_TASK to confirm the target task, confirm with the user, and re-check created-task IDs on retry) to satisfy the destructive/batch feedback-loop requirement.

Deduplicate the pitfalls: the Known Pitfalls section restates case-sensitive status, millisecond dates, notify_all, and folderless lists already covered per-workflow — keep each pitfall in one place and reference it.

Move the 20-row Quick Reference table and per-tool parameter details into a references/ file (e.g. references/tool-reference.md) linked one level deep from SKILL.md, and replace the circular "When to Use" section with real trigger guidance or delete it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body mostly assumes Claude's competence (no concept explanations, dense parameter tables), but it has noticeable redundancy: pitfalls repeated across sections (case-sensitive status stated three times, millisecond timestamps three times, notify_all and folderless-lists rules twice), overlapping Prerequisites/Setup sections, and a pure-filler "When to Use" section ("applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview"). That is more than minor trimmable padding, so it sits at 3 rather than 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

This is an instruction-only MCP-orchestration skill and the guidance is fully executable: exact tool slugs, ordered sequences tagged [Prerequisite]/[Required]/[Optional], parameter names with types and enums (priority 1-4, page starting at 0, 25/100 page sizes), and precise quirks like URL-encoding statuses ("to%20do") and passing " " to clear a description. The five workflows cover the common cases with specific, directly usable guidance.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Each workflow has a clear numbered tool sequence with role tags and some checkpoints (verify task via GET_TASK before commenting, confirm connection ACTIVE before running), but the skill includes destructive and batch operations — CLICKUP_DELETE_TASK and bulk creation with 429/retry-duplicate risks — without any validation step before deletion (e.g., GET_TASK to confirm the right task or user confirmation). Per the rubric guideline this caps workflow clarity at 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), so all ~230 lines live inline in SKILL.md with good section headers, but content that would benefit from being split out — the 20-row quick-reference table, the per-tool parameter lists, and the known-pitfalls catalog — is inlined rather than placed in one-level-deep reference files. That matches anchor 3 (structure present, content that should be separate is inline), not the well-split anchor 4.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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 solidly specific, niche description that clearly conveys what it automates and through which mechanism, but it lacks any explicit when-to-use trigger clause, which both caps completeness and slightly weakens routing. Adding a "Use when..." sentence with natural trigger phrases would lift it to the top band.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user mentions ClickUp, or asks to create/assign/update tasks, spaces, lists, or comments in their project tracker."

Replace the generic verb "Automate" with itemized concrete actions (e.g. "Create and update tasks, navigate spaces/folders/lists, add comments, manage team members") to raise specificity.

Include common user synonyms such as "assign", "due dates", and "subtasks" in the trigger phrase to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("ClickUp project management") and enumerates several concrete operation areas ("tasks, spaces, folders, lists, comments, and team operations") plus the mechanism ("via Rube MCP (Composio)"). It falls short of a 5 because actions are one generic verb ("Automate") over enumerated objects rather than itemized concrete actions like create/update/delete.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clearly stated (automate ClickUp objects via Rube MCP), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline. The trailing sentence "Always search tools first for current schemas" is behavioral instruction, not a when-to-use trigger.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a ClickUp user would say are present: "ClickUp", "tasks", "comments", "spaces", "folders", "lists", "team", "project management". Common variations users say are missing, e.g. "assign", "due dates", "subtasks", "to-do", so it fits anchor 4 rather than the synonym-complete anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"ClickUp" plus "Rube MCP (Composio)" carves a clear niche with minimal confusion against unrelated skills. It stays at 4 rather than 5 because the generic "project management" framing without a when-clause leaves minor overlap risk with closely related PM-tool or Composio/Rube skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Path

skills/clickup-automation/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.