CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

sred-work-summary

Go back through the previous year of work and create a Notion doc that groups relevant links into projects that can then be documented as SRED projects.

52

Quality

59%

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/sred-work-summary/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is sred-work-summary in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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 lays out a clear, well-sequenced multi-step workflow with explicit validation checklists, but its core data-collection and document-creation steps stay at a high level without executable command or MCP tool examples. Some redundancy in the 'Ensure' blocks and repeated warnings could be trimmed.

Suggestions

Add concrete executable examples for the core operations, e.g. a `gh pr list --author <user> --search 'created:YYYY-MM-DD..YYYY-MM-DD'` snippet and example Notion/Linear MCP tool calls.

De-duplicate the 'DO NOT truncate...' guidance (move it to a single shared note) and prune 'Ensure:' items that merely restate the preceding step.

Add a brief error-recovery feedback loop for the validation checkpoints (e.g., what to do when an 'Ensure' check fails other than the Step 3 stop-guard).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient with no over-explanation of known concepts, but redundant 'Ensure:' blocks restate the preceding step text and the 'DO NOT truncate...' warning is duplicated verbatim in Steps 5 and 6, so it could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete commands (date +%Y, find -name .git) but the core operations (finding PRs/Notion docs/Linear tickets, creating the Notion doc, inserting links) are described abstractly without specific gh/MCP tool examples, leaving missing key details.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-8 are clearly sequenced with explicit 'Ensure:' checklists after most steps and a stop-guard in Step 3; the batch operation has validation so no cap applies, but error-recovery feedback loops are absent.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single well-sectioned file (Prerequisites/Process/Resources) with one external example link and no nested references; structure is appropriate for this procedural workflow, though no overview-to-reference split is demonstrated.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 states a clear, specific purpose but lacks any 'Use when' trigger guidance, which caps completeness and weakens trigger term quality. It is distinct enough to avoid most conflicts but would benefit from explicit activation phrasing and naming the data sources it actually draws from.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when preparing a year-end SRED work summary or documenting annual contributions.'

Name the concrete data sources in the description (GitHub PRs, Notion docs, Linear tickets) so users and Claude can match the skill to the right moment.

Include natural synonyms/extensions a user might say (e.g. 'year-end review', 'annual contribution summary') to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete actions ('create a Notion doc', 'groups relevant links into projects', 'documented as SRED projects') but omits the actual sources (GitHub PRs, Notion docs, Linear tickets), leaving minor gaps in coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (collect prior year work, group into projects, document as SRED in Notion) but no 'when'/'Use when' clause, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some natural terms ('SRED', 'Notion doc', 'previous year of work', 'projects') but misses common variations and the source-specific keywords (GitHub, Linear, PRs, tickets) a user would say.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The SRED annual work summary niche is mostly distinct with minor overlap risk, though the absence of explicit trigger phrasing keeps it just below a clear-niche score of 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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.