Name: openclaw-github-repo-commander
Rating: 56.00000000000001 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

Blog Docs Log in Get started

openclaw-github-repo-commander

7-stage super workflow for GitHub repo audit, cleanup, PR review, and competitor analysis

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/openclaw-github-repo-commander/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is openclaw-github-repo-commander in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

63%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 presents a clear, well-sequenced 7-stage workflow with concrete audit specifics and a validation stage. Its main weaknesses are the missing referenced script bundle and the absence of any executable code examples inline.

Suggestions

Provide the referenced scripts/repo-audit.sh (and pr_todo.json) in a scripts/ bundle, or remove the references and inline the actual audit checks as executable commands.

Add at least one copy-paste-ready command or code block (e.g. an example gh CLI call or a sample audit invocation with expected output) to lift actionability.

Spell out the Stage 6→7 feedback loop explicitly (e.g. 'If validation fails, return to Stage 6, fix, and re-run until 7/7 PASS') to push workflow clarity toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with short stage descriptions and bullet lists and no over-explanation of git/GitHub concepts, but the Overview paragraph and Best Practices/Security sections add a few tokens that could be trimmed, placing it just above the midpoint.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete specifics (secret patterns ghp_/sk_/AKIA, >1MB threshold, commit prefixes, example invocations) but shows no executable code block and the referenced scripts/repo-audit.sh is missing from the bundle, leaving guidance incomplete.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Seven stages are clearly sequenced with an explicit Stage 7 validation checkpoint (target 7/7 PASS) and a user-confirmation gate on destructive Stage 6 changes, but no detailed error-recovery feedback loop or checklist is spelled out beyond the re-run target.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body has good section structure (Overview, When to Use, How It Works, Examples) but references scripts/repo-audit.sh and pr_todo.json that do not exist in any bundle directory, so the references are present but broken and not clearly navigable.	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.

The description is specific and trigger-rich for a GitHub repository workflow, listing multiple concrete capabilities. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to audit, clean up, or review a GitHub repository, or to benchmark it against competitors.'

Drop the 'super workflow' buzzword and lead with verb-led actions ('Audits, cleans up, reviews PRs, and benchmarks GitHub repositories') to lift specificity toward 5.

Include natural synonyms (e.g. 'repository', 'code review', 'security scan') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the GitHub repo domain and several concrete actions (audit, cleanup, PR review, competitor analysis), but presents them as noun phrases rather than verb-led actions and pads with 'super workflow' buzzword, sitting between anchors 3 and 5 but clearly above the midpoint.	4 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' (audit, cleanup, PR review, competitor analysis) but no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms a user would say ('audit', 'cleanup', 'PR review', 'competitor analysis', 'GitHub repo') with good coverage, but misses common synonyms and file extensions that would push it to a 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a fairly distinct GitHub-repo-management niche with clear triggers, but spans several broad areas (audit, cleanup, PR review, competitor analysis) that overlap with dedicated code-review or git skills, keeping it just below a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/openclaw-github-repo-commander/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 3 days 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.