CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

reconcile-code-review

Reconcile raw specialist findings against the previous bot review and human PR comments to produce a final classified finding list.

63

Quality

73%

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 ./.flue/.agents/skills/reconcile-code-review/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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 content is a well-structured, actionable instruction skill with concrete classification rules and a ready-to-use output schema; its main weaknesses are light cross-mode repetition and the absence of an explicit output-validation checkpoint.

Suggestions

Add a brief verification step in the Output section (e.g. 'confirm every currentFindings id appears in exactly one bucket and severities are unchanged') to push workflow clarity toward 5.

Factor the shared active/ignored logic that repeats across full and incremental modes into a short common block, then state only the deltas per mode, to trim conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body assumes Claude knows what PRs and code reviews are and avoids concept explanations; minor repetition across the full/incremental mode sections (active/resolved/ignored re-stated per mode) could be tightened, placing it above 3 but not fully lean at 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: explicit per-mode decision rules, sufficient/insufficient reason examples, third-person reviewer_note instruction, and a copy-paste-ready JSON output schema with a full worked example covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequencing keyed on diffMode with explicit per-bucket rules and fallbacks ('When in doubt, keep a finding active', 'Do NOT mark resolved merely because absent'), but there is no explicit verify-the-output step, leaving minor checkpoint gaps short of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single self-contained file organized into well-labeled sections (Inputs, Security, Reconciliation rules, Output) with no external references needed; it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception, so it lands at 4 rather than 5, with minor organization gaps only.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

65%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 is specific and distinct, clearly stating what the skill does, but it omits an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, which caps completeness and leaves the trigger guidance only implied.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause (e.g. 'Use when reconciling fresh code-review findings against a prior bot review and PR comments') to lift completeness past the 3 cap.

Broaden trigger-term coverage with natural synonyms like 'review history', 'merge findings', or 're-review a PR' so users phrase it more ways.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('reconcile code-review findings') and a couple concrete actions ('reconcile raw specialist findings against the previous bot review and human PR comments', 'produce a final classified finding list') but these collapse into one workflow rather than a comprehensive action list, matching anchor 3.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states the 'what' but has no 'Use when...' or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which the rubric caps at 3; the 'when' is only weakly implied from the domain.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural keywords a user would say are present ('code review', 'findings', 'PR comments', 'reconcile', 'classified finding list'), giving good coverage; a few common synonyms (e.g. 'review history', 'merge findings') are missing, so it sits above 3 but not fully comprehensive at 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The reconciliation niche — matching findings against a previous bot review and human PR comments to produce classified buckets — is highly specific with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with general code-review skills.

5 / 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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
cloudflare/cloudflare-docs
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.