Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a well-sequenced, highly actionable procedure with strong validation and approval checkpoints. Its only weakness is progressive disclosure: substantial inline reference tables that could live in separate files.
Suggestions
Move the template-to-kind/label and path-prefix-to-component mapping tables into a reference file (e.g. references/labels.md) and link to it, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview.
Consider extracting the GraphQL issue-type resolution and sub-issue registration commands into a scripts/ helper or reference, since they are verbose and rarely need inline editing.
Add a one-line pointer to the bundle layout at the top of the body so readers can navigate to the split reference files once they exist.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is action-dense with executable commands and tables and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place even at ~200 lines. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready gh/git/graphql commands plus temp-file body handling and explicit mapping tables, matching the fully-executable anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 7-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints — sensitive-data redaction, an approval gate ('Do NOT call gh issue create yet'), and a revise-and-re-ask loop — gives strong feedback loops. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the skill is a single well-sectioned document, but the sizable inline template/component mapping tables could be split into referenced files for cleaner navigation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |