CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

plannotator-review

Open Plannotator's browser-based code review UI and address the returned feedback.

62

Quality

73%

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 ./apps/kiro-cli/skills/plannotator-review/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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 an exemplar of brevity for a simple single-command skill: executable, well-organized, and free of padding, with only a minor gap in showing how returned feedback is handled.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and efficient — only the run command and the optional PR URL argument — with no padding or over-explanation, assuming Claude's competence.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready, executable commands for both the base case and the optional PR URL, but offers no concrete example of how to handle the returned feedback.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A single-purpose skill whose single action ('plannotator review') is unambiguous; per the simple-skill exception this can score 5, and no destructive or batch operations require validation.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no need for external references, organized into a clear title, the run command, and the optional argument; meets the simple-skill bar for a top score.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 identifies the Plannotator code-review niche and its two core actions, but lacks an explicit trigger clause and richer natural-language keywords that would drive reliable activation.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to run a Plannotator review, open the code review UI, or work through returned review comments.'

Replace the generic 'address the returned feedback' with concrete actions such as 'triage, reply to, and resolve review comments.'

Include natural synonyms users would say, such as 'code review', 'PR feedback', and 'review comments'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (Plannotator review UI) and two concrete actions ('Open...UI' and 'address the returned feedback'), but 'address the returned feedback' is generic and not comprehensive.

3 / 5

Completeness

Gives a clear 'what' (open the review UI and address feedback) but provides no explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant keywords ('code review UI', 'returned feedback') but misses the natural phrases a user would actually say, like 'review my PR' or 'handle review comments'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Names the distinct Plannotator niche with low conflict risk, but the generic 'address the returned feedback' leaves minor overlap with other review-oriented skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
backnotprop/plannotator
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.