CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ralph-two-pass-scan

Cuts GitHub API calls by separating lightweight list scanning from full hydration

61

Quality

72%

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 ./.squad/skills/ralph-two-pass-scan/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

87%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is lean, executable, and well-organized for a compact single-purpose skill. The only gap is a missing explicit validation checkpoint in the batch scanning workflow.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation step after Pass 1 (e.g., count survivors; if >30%, tighten filters and re-scan before any hydration) to form a validate-fix-retry loop.

Spell out the failure/edge behavior when the survivor count greatly exceeds the 30% threshold rather than relying on a one-line rule of thumb.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with no padding or restating of concepts Claude already knows; every section (context, two passes, skip table, rule of thumb) earns its place.

3 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable `gh issue list` and `gh issue view` commands plus concrete skip conditions in a table and a specific <=30% hydration rule — copy-paste ready.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The two-pass sequence is clearly ordered, but this is a batch scanning operation with no explicit validation/verification checkpoint, capping workflow clarity at 2.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no bundle files needed, and content is organized into clear Context/Pattern sections with distinct Pass 1 and Pass 2 subsections.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 concise and names a clear, specific niche, but it lacks an explicit 'when to use' trigger and offers only a couple of concrete actions rather than a comprehensive set.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers (e.g., scanning GitHub issues, reducing API calls, N+1 hydration).

Broaden the action list beyond the two named (scan and hydrate) to cover the full capability surface.

Include more user-natural phrasing like 'GitHub issues' or 'reduce API rate-limit usage' alongside the technical terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Quotes 'Cuts GitHub API calls' and 'separating lightweight list scanning from full hydration' name a domain and two related actions, but not a comprehensive list of capabilities.

2 / 3

Completeness

It states clearly what the skill does but provides no 'Use when...' trigger, so per the guidelines completeness is capped at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

'GitHub API calls', 'list scanning', and 'hydration' are relevant but lean toward technical jargon and miss common natural variations a user would say.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The GitHub-API-scan-vs-hydration niche is specific and unlikely to overlap with unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

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
bradygaster/squad
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.