CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

incident-response-smart-fix

[Extended thinking: This workflow implements a sophisticated debugging and resolution pipeline that leverages AI-assisted debugging tools and observability platforms to systematically diagnose and res

31

Quality

39%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/incident-response-smart-fix/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is incident-response-smart-fix in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

17%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 almost entirely padding: a leaked extended-thinking paragraph, tautological use/don't-use boilerplate, and platitudinous instructions with zero concrete guidance. Its only substantive pointer is to a nonexistent file, so the skill provides no executable workflow and no reachable detail.

Suggestions

Delete the leaked "[Extended thinking: ...]" paragraph and replace the Instructions with the actual four-phase workflow as concrete, sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., how to run git bisect, which regression suites to run, how to verify the fix).

Fix or create the referenced "resources/implementation-playbook.md" — currently the path resolves to nothing — and make the Resources section clearly signal what each referenced file contains.

Remove the tautological "Use/Do not use this skill when" bullets or rewrite them with real trigger conditions and concrete agent/tool assignments.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Roughly 85% of the body is a leaked "[Extended thinking: ...]" prose blob that restates the description with no instructional value, the "Use this skill when / Do not use this skill when" sections are tautological boilerplate, and the resource path is mentioned twice. Several padded sections that add nothing Claude does not already have.

2 / 5

Actionability

The Instructions are pure abstraction: "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs", "Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes", "Provide actionable steps and verification". There is no code, command, tool, agent name, or example anywhere in the body — it describes rather than instructs.

1 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The only sequence is three vague bullets (clarify → apply → provide) with poorly defined steps and no concrete validation checkpoint; "validate outcomes" is name-only. The four-phase pipeline described in the extended-thinking blob is never operationalized into actual executable steps.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The sole reference, "resources/implementation-playbook.md", points to a file that does not exist (no resources directory), so navigation fails. Meanwhile the 400-word extended-thinking blob is content that clearly belongs in a separate reference file, inlined into SKILL.md.

2 / 5

Total

7

/

20

Passed

Description

32%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 frontmatter description is a malformed artifact: a leaked "[Extended thinking: ...]" prefix, truncated mid-word ("...and res"), with no "Use when" trigger and only buzzword-laden, generic capability claims. It fails to communicate concrete capabilities or when to invoke the skill, and the truncation makes even the stated intent incoherent.

Suggestions

Replace the leaked, truncated extended-thinking text with a clean one- to two-sentence description of concrete actions, e.g. "Diagnoses production issues by analyzing error traces and logs, runs automated git bisect to find the introducing commit, and implements minimal fixes with test coverage. Use when fixing production bugs, incidents, or regressions."

Add an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause with natural user phrases such as "production incident", "root cause", "regression", or "fix this bug".

Drop buzzwords ("sophisticated", "leverages") and naming specific agents/tools only if they are concrete capabilities, so the description is distinguishable from generic debugging skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("debugging and resolution pipeline that leverages AI-assisted debugging tools and observability platforms") but the only actions are the generic, truncated "systematically diagnose and res". No concrete capabilities are enumerated, and the text is wrapped in buzzwords ("sophisticated", "leverages").

2 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is present but vague ("implements a sophisticated debugging and resolution pipeline") with no concrete actions, and there is no "Use when" trigger clause anywhere. This matches the vague-what/no-when anchor, and the missing trigger clause caps completeness regardless.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Some relevant keywords appear ("debugging", "diagnose", "resolution", "observability platforms"), but the natural phrases users would actually say ("fix this bug", "error", "incident", "crash", "root cause") are missing, and the framing is jargon-heavy rather than user-natural.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The broad debugging/issue-resolution framing would overlap with virtually any debugging, bug-fix, or code-review skill; the only distinguishing markers ("AI-assisted", "observability platforms") are vague marketing terms rather than concrete niche triggers.

2 / 5

Total

9

/

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

plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/incident-response-smart-fix/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.