ubuntu-write-sru

Generates a complete Ubuntu SRU Bug Description template ([Impact], [Test Plan], [Where problems could occur]) using interactive human guidance to filter out noise. Trigger phrases: "sru template", "ubuntu sru description", "write sru bug".

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Quality

Content

75%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 well-structured, single-purpose skill with a clear gated workflow, explicit per-step criteria, and a concrete output template. Main gaps are the absence of an error-recovery feedback loop and minor persona/meta padding.

Suggestions

Add a brief feedback loop in Step 2/3 for when the fetched bug text is empty, private, or ambiguous (e.g., re-ask the user for raw text) to push workflow_clarity toward 5.

Trim the Persona/Role/Tone bullets and the meta 'Brevity is King' line; fold the tone directly into the output rules to reduce token overhead.

Include one short worked example of a finished [Impact]/[Test Plan]/[Where problems could occur] block to make the output guidance fully copy-paste-ready.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly lean and assumes Claude's competence, but the Persona/Role/Tone block and meta-instructions like 'Brevity is King' and 'Avoid corporate speak' are mild over-explanation that could be trimmed; not a 5 because not every token earns its place.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides a copy-paste-ready template, a concrete URL transform ('.../+bug/1234567' -> '.../+bug/1234567/+text'), and explicit command examples ('sudo apt install ...'); not a 5 because Step 3 noise-filtering is somewhat abstract and no fully worked completed example is shown.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Four clearly sequenced steps each with an explicit Criterion checkpoint and a mandatory 'Stop and wait for the user' gate in Step 1; not a 5 because there is no error-recovery feedback loop for cases where extraction is ambiguous or yields nothing.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clearly headed sections with the template appropriately inlined as the core deliverable and no nested references; not a 5 because the body (~75 lines) exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill threshold and there are no one-level-deep references to signal.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

87%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 strong, third-person description that concretely names the deliverable and its sections, explains the interaction mechanism, and supplies explicit trigger phrases. Minor keyword synonym gaps are the only weakness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the concrete domain ('Ubuntu SRU Bug Description template') plus the three exact sections ([Impact], [Test Plan], [Where problems could occur]) and the mechanism ('interactive human guidance to filter out noise'); not a 5 because the skill is single-purpose so the action list is not comprehensively broad.	4 / 5
Completeness	Clearly states what it does (generates the full SRU template with named sections via interactive guidance) and explicitly answers when with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor for explicit what-and-when.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Three explicit natural phrases ('sru template', 'ubuntu sru description', 'write sru bug') a user would plausibly say; not a 5 because common synonyms like 'sru bug report' or 'stable release update template' are absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Targets a clear niche (Ubuntu SRU bug descriptions) with distinct, domain-specific triggers, making accidental firing for unrelated skills unlikely.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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: canonical/copilot-collections
Path: groups/ubuntu-engineering/skills/ubuntu-write-sru/SKILL.md
Commit: d41d8d9

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.