CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

comprehensive-review-pr-enhance

Generate structured PR descriptions from diffs, add review checklists, risk assessments, and test coverage summaries. Use when the user says "write a PR description", "improve this PR", "summarize my changes", "PR review", "pull request", or asks to document a diff for reviewers.

66

Quality

80%

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

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.

The body is concise and actionable with a useful template and concrete commands, but the workflow lacks validation checkpoints and the sole external reference points to a non-existent file. Fixing the dead reference and adding a verify step would materially improve the score.

Suggestions

Create the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md (or correct the path) so the one-level reference resolves to a real file.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint to the workflow, e.g., after generating the description, verify the diff-stat file list matches the Changes table before presenting it.

Add a brief feedback loop for the large-PR splitting step, e.g., confirm each split part still builds/passes tests before recommending it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows, but illustrative example rows in the Changes table and placeholder checklist items could be trimmed slightly; not a 5 because of these minor padding instances.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides a copy-paste PR template and executable git commands ('git diff <base>...HEAD --stat', 'git checkout -b', 'git cherry-pick') plus specific checklist items; not a 5 because risk scoring is deferred to a resource that does not exist, leaving a small gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The five-step workflow is clearly sequenced, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops (e.g., verify diff scope, confirm checklist applied); anchor 3 fits since checkpoints are missing or implicit.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and the single reference is clearly signaled one level deep, but the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' does not exist (no resources/ directory), so navigation fails and the structure cannot score higher.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

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, third-person description that clearly states four concrete capabilities and pairs them with explicit, natural-language trigger phrases. The only weakness is slight overlap risk between 'PR review'/'improve this PR' and broader review skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names four concrete actions — 'Generate structured PR descriptions from diffs, add review checklists, risk assessments, and test coverage summaries' — matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor; not a 4 because coverage is broad rather than having minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (the four actions) and when ('Use when the user says...') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 example; voice is third person so no penalty applies.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural user phrases such as 'write a PR description', 'improve this PR', 'summarize my changes', 'PR review', 'pull request', and 'document a diff', covering synonyms and variations as the anchor-5 example does.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear PR-enhancement niche, but triggers like 'PR review' and 'improve this PR' risk minor overlap with general code-review or commit-message skills; not a 5 because conflict risk is not quite minimal.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

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
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.