CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

pr-review-expert

Use when the user asks to review pull requests, analyze code changes, check for security issues in PRs, or assess code quality of diffs.

62

Quality

78%

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 ./.gemini/skills/pr-review-expert/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is pr-review-expert in alirezarezvani/claude-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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.

A highly actionable, executable skill body dominated by copy-paste-ready commands, a clear six-step workflow, and a thorough checklist. Its main weaknesses are the absence of any progressive disclosure (everything is inlined in SKILL.md with no reference files) and missing validation checkpoints in the workflow. Bonus: careful handling of secret material (curl -K - stdin config, .netrc note) avoids the token-leak patterns it warns about.

Suggestions

Move the 30+ item checklist and the security grep catalog to references/ files (e.g. references/checklist.md, references/security-patterns.md), keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview that links to them.

Add a validation checkpoint early in the workflow (e.g., confirm the diff file is non-empty and the PR exists before running scans) and a feedback loop for failed checks.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Nearly every token is executable commands, checklists, or output templates rather than explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Minor trimmable redundancy exists — Overview, Core Capabilities, and When to Use overlap, and some bash comments restate the obvious — so anchor 4 (efficient, minor over-explanation) rather than 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable, copy-paste-ready gh/glab/grep/jq commands throughout, concrete decision rules ("Coverage drop >5% → block merge"), a complete 30+ item checklist, and a full output template with severity tiers. Matches anchor 5; the only placeholders (org URL, ticket IDs) are inherently user-specific, not gaps.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Six clearly sequenced steps (Fetch Context → Blast Radius → Security Scan → Coverage Delta → Breaking Change Detection → Performance Impact) with severity rubrics and a checklist. Anchor 4 rather than 5 because there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops (e.g., verifying the diff was fetched non-empty before scanning, or re-checking after fixes).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good internal section structure with clear headers, but the entire ~400-line body is inlined in SKILL.md with no reference files at all — the 30+ item checklist and the security grep catalog are prime candidates for references/. Matches anchor 3 (content that should be separate is inline); not 2 because headers keep it navigable, not 4 because nothing is split out.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

A solid trigger-focused description with natural keywords and a clear PR-review niche, but it is entirely 'when' with no explicit 'what' — the skill's distinctive capabilities (blast radius, breaking change detection, coverage delta) never appear, and GitLab MR terms are omitted despite the skill supporting them. Voice is appropriately third-person/impersonal.

Suggestions

Lead with a one-line what-statement naming the distinctive capabilities, e.g. "Performs structured PR review with blast radius analysis, security scanning, breaking change detection, and test coverage delta. Use when..."

Add GitLab trigger terms ("merge request", "MR") since the skill supports glab workflows, and keep "PR"/"diff" which are already natural.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ("review pull requests, analyze code changes, check for security issues in PRs, or assess code quality of diffs") but they are generic review verbs; the skill's distinctive capabilities (blast radius analysis, breaking change detection, test coverage delta) are not named. Fits anchor 4 (several specific actions, minor gaps) rather than 5 (comprehensive) and is clearly above anchor 3 (only 1-2 concrete actions).

4 / 5

Completeness

The explicit "Use when the user asks to..." clause answers 'when' well, but the description is purely trigger-based with no separate statement of what the skill does — the 'what' is only weakly implied by the trigger verbs. This sits between anchor 2 (only 'when' present) and anchor 3; it is above 2 because the embedded actions partially convey the what, but below 4 because no distinct what-statement exists.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say: "review pull requests", "code changes", "security issues", "code quality", "diffs". Missing common variations such as "MR"/"merge request" despite the skill supporting GitLab, so anchor 4 (good coverage, a few natural terms missing) rather than 5 (comprehensive synonyms).

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The PR/diff review niche with security and code-quality triggers is mostly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against generic code-review skills. Matches anchor 4; not 5 because "analyze code changes" and "code quality" could collide with general code-review skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

alirezarezvani/claude-skills

Path

.gemini/skills/pr-review-expert/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.