CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

issue-triage

Scan open issues and discussions. Dedupe, prioritize, and propose labels. Updates issue-triage-state.md. L1 propose-only — never auto-label or close.

56

Quality

65%

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 ./starters/issue-triage/.claude/skills/issue-triage/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%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 a lean, well-structured spec with a concrete output template and explicit priority/label rules, but as a batch operation it lacks an enumerated workflow sequence and validation checkpoints, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add a short numbered workflow (1. fetch open issues + prior state → 2. dedupe → 3. score P0–P3 → 4. propose labels → 5. write state) so the sequence is explicit rather than implied.

Define the 'loop score' used to rank the Top 5, or replace it with the concrete P-level + age ordering the scoring table already specifies.

Insert a validation checkpoint before writing state (e.g., re-confirm no P0/P1/security labels are auto-applied and that proposed duplicates are marked 'possible') to lift workflow clarity above the batch-operation cap.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows — a compact scoring table, an output template, and tight rules — but the opening role framing ('You are an issue queue health agent…') is mildly padded, fitting the 4 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' anchor rather than 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, copy-paste-ready output template plus an explicit P0–P3 signal table and an allowlisted-labels list give mostly executable guidance; the 'Top 5 (by loop score)' reference is never defined, a minor gap that keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

This is a batch operation over issues, and the judging notes cap workflow_clarity at 3 when batch operations lack validation checkpoints; the sequence (scan → dedupe → score → propose → write state) is only implicit from the section order, with no explicit validation/feedback step, matching the 3 anchor.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external reference files (the referenced .md files are runtime state, not skill docs), and is organized into clear sections, so the simple-skill exception lets progressive disclosure score 5.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 states what the skill does with concrete actions and a distinctive propose-only constraint, but it omits any 'when to use it' trigger guidance, which caps completeness and leaves trigger-term coverage partial.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when…' clause naming natural triggers (e.g., 'Use when triaging a GitHub backlog, deduplicating open issues, or proposing labels and priority').

Include common synonyms users actually say — 'backlog', 'triage', 'issue queue' — to improve trigger-term coverage.

Optionally name the state file and the propose-only guard in a way that doubles as a trigger cue (e.g., 'Use when keeping an issue backlog legible').

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (issues/discussions) and several concrete actions — 'Scan open issues', 'Dedupe, prioritize, and propose labels', 'Updates issue-triage-state.md' — matching the 'lists several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than 5, which expects more granular coverage of mechanisms.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear and concrete, but there is no 'Use when…' clause or equivalent trigger guidance; per the judging guidelines a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3, so it does not reach 4.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant terms like 'issues', 'discussions', and 'labels' appear, but common variations users would say (backlog, triage, queue) are missing and there is no trigger phrasing; this fits 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' better than 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The issue-triage niche plus the 'L1 propose-only — never auto-label or close' constraint make it mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against closely related triage skills, matching the 4 anchor rather than 3.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

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
cobusgreyling/loop-engineering
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.