CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

gitlab-automation

Automate GitLab project management, issues, merge requests, pipelines, branches, and user operations via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.

57

Quality

66%

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 ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/gitlab-automation/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is gitlab-automation in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 content is highly actionable, with concrete tool sequences, typed parameters, and pitfalls for each GitLab workflow, and is well-structured for navigation. Its main weakness is redundancy from a duplicated pitfalls section and a generic When-to-Use line that inflate the token budget without adding value.

Suggestions

Remove or deduplicate the 'Known Pitfalls' section since each pitfall already appears in its workflow's 'Pitfalls' block, or collapse the per-workflow pitfalls into the central section to avoid repetition.

Replace the generic 'When to Use' line ('applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview') with concrete trigger conditions or delete it.

Add a brief validate-step after create/update workflows (e.g., 'Verify the issue was created by re-listing with search=title') to close the workflow_clarity validation gap.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly dense and reference-oriented, but the 'Known Pitfalls' section largely restates pitfalls already given per-workflow (labels replace all, assignee_ids [0], mutually exclusive author filters) and the generic 'When to Use' line ('applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview') adds nothing.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete tool sequences with typed parameters and examples ('id: Project ID (integer) or URL-encoded path', 'assignee_ids: [0] to unassign all'), which is mostly executable guidance, though full example payloads for create/update flows are absent.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Each workflow has a numbered 'Tool sequence' with Prerequisite/Required/Optional annotations and a 'When to use' header, and Setup includes an explicit ACTIVE-status checkpoint; minor gaps are the absence of validate-then-retry feedback loops after create/update operations.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single file is well-organized with clear section headers and a navigable Quick Reference table, and no bundle files exist so no references are needed; the only organization gap is the redundant duplication of pitfalls between per-workflow sections and the 'Known Pitfalls' section.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

The description clearly states what the skill automates across GitLab domains and is well-scoped to a distinct niche, but it omits an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, capping its completeness. Trigger keyword coverage is strong but could add a few more natural synonyms.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to manage GitLab issues, merge requests, pipelines, or projects.'

Include a few more natural trigger terms like 'CI/CD', 'commits', 'code review', or '.gitlab-ci.yml' to broaden keyword coverage.

Vary the verb beyond 'Automate ... operations' to name more concrete actions (create, list, update, monitor) for higher specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific concrete action domains ('project management, issues, merge requests, pipelines, branches, and user operations'), giving broad coverage, though the single verb 'Automate ... operations' leaves minor gaps in action specificity.

4 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (the enumerated GitLab operations) but no 'Use when...' or equivalent explicit trigger clause, so per the guideline completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage ('GitLab', 'issues', 'merge requests', 'pipelines', 'branches'), but a few common terms users would say (CI/CD, commits, code review) are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The GitLab-specific scope qualified by 'via Rube MCP (Composio)' carves a clear niche with mostly distinct triggers, with only minor overlap risk against other GitLab or generic MCP 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.

Validation15 / 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.