github

Use the `gh` CLI for issues, pull requests, Actions runs, and GitHub API queries.

Quality

63%

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 ./skills/github/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

64%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 solid, practical skill that provides concrete gh CLI commands organized into logical sections. Its main weakness is the duplication of commands between the standalone examples and the debugging workflow, which wastes tokens. Adding a feedback loop (re-run CI, verify fix) to the debugging workflow and removing the redundant standalone command listings would meaningfully improve it.

Suggestions

Remove the standalone PR/run command examples that are duplicated verbatim in the 'Debugging a CI Failure' workflow, or consolidate them into the workflow section only.

Add a verification step to the debugging workflow (e.g., after pushing a fix: 'Re-run the workflow: `gh run rerun <run-id> --repo owner/repo` and re-check with `gh pr checks`').

Show how to capture the run ID from `gh run list` output (e.g., using `--json databaseId --jq`) so the workflow is fully executable without manual lookup.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is mostly efficient but has notable redundancy: the individual PR/run commands are listed once as standalone examples and then repeated nearly verbatim in the 'Debugging a CI Failure' workflow section. The introductory 'When to Use' section also restates what the description already conveys. Trimming the duplicated commands would tighten it significantly.	3 / 5
Actionability	All guidance is concrete with copy-paste-ready bash commands and real flags. Minor gaps: placeholder `<run-id>` is used without showing how to capture it from a previous step's output, and there are no examples for `gh issue` or `gh pr create` despite issues being mentioned in 'When to Use'.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 'Debugging a CI Failure' section provides a clear numbered sequence, but it lacks any validation or feedback loop—there is no step for verifying a fix, re-triggering the run, or confirming the CI passes after changes. For a debugging workflow this omission is notable, though the operation is non-destructive so the cap at 3 is appropriate rather than mandatory.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines of substantive content, covers a single tool, and has no need for external reference files. Sections are well-organized with clear headers (Pull Requests, Debugging, API, JSON Output), making navigation easy.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

61%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 is concise and identifies the tool and domain areas clearly, but lacks concrete action verbs (e.g., 'create', 'list', 'merge') and an explicit 'Use when...' clause. It would benefit from specifying actions and trigger conditions to help Claude select it appropriately from a large skill set.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger phrases like 'Use when the user asks about GitHub issues, pull requests, CI/CD status, or needs to interact with GitHub repositories via command line'

Replace category nouns with concrete actions: e.g., 'Creates and manages issues, opens and merges pull requests, monitors Actions workflow runs, and queries the GitHub API'

Include common synonyms and abbreviations users might say: 'PR', 'CI', 'workflow', 'GitHub CLI', 'repo'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (GitHub CLI) and lists several areas (issues, pull requests, Actions runs, API queries), but these are categories rather than concrete actions like 'create issues', 'merge pull requests', or 'trigger workflow runs'.	3 / 5
Completeness	Has a clear 'what' (use gh CLI for issues, PRs, Actions, API queries) but lacks an explicit 'when' clause. There's no 'Use when...' guidance for Claude to know the trigger conditions.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes good natural keywords like 'gh', 'issues', 'pull requests', 'Actions runs', and 'GitHub API queries' that users would naturally mention. Missing some variations like 'PR', 'CI', 'workflow', 'repo', or 'GitHub CLI'.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Fairly distinct due to the specific mention of 'gh' CLI tool and GitHub-specific concepts. Minor overlap risk with generic git skills or GitHub web interface skills, but the CLI focus helps differentiate.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

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

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: skills/github/SKILL.md
Commit: 0159794

Reviewed: about 9 hours 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.