CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

fix-ci

Find failing PR checks, inspect logs or external check links, and apply focused fixes

52

Quality

57%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./cursor-team-kit/skills/fix-ci/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%

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

A concise, well-structured skill that clearly defines its trigger, workflow, and guardrails. Its main weakness is limited actionability—beyond the initial `gh pr checks` command, the steps are directional rather than providing concrete commands for log inspection and common fix patterns. Adding a few more executable examples would significantly improve its utility.

Suggestions

Add concrete commands for inspecting failed job logs, e.g., `gh run view <run-id> --log-failed` and how to identify the run ID from check output.

Include a brief example showing a common failure pattern and the corresponding minimal fix to make 'apply the smallest safe fix' more actionable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every line serves a purpose. No unnecessary explanations of what CI is, how GitHub works, or what PR checks are. Assumes Claude's competence throughout.

3 / 3

Actionability

Provides one concrete command (`gh pr checks --json name,bucket,state,workflow,link`) but the rest is directional rather than executable. Steps like 'extract the first actionable error' and 'apply the smallest safe fix' lack specific commands or examples (e.g., how to fetch logs with `gh run view --log-failed`).

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The workflow has a clear sequence and an implicit feedback loop (push, re-check, repeat until green), but lacks explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery guidance. For example, there's no guidance on what to do if the check link points to an external service rather than GitHub Actions, or how to handle flaky tests vs. real failures.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple, single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no need for external references. The content is well-organized into clear sections (Trigger, Workflow, Guardrails, Output) that are easy to scan.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

42%

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 does a good job listing specific actions (finding failing checks, inspecting logs, applying fixes) but critically lacks any 'Use when...' guidance, which is essential for Claude to know when to select this skill from a large pool. It also misses common trigger terms users would naturally use like 'CI', 'pipeline', 'build failure', or 'GitHub Actions'.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when PR checks are failing, CI/CD pipelines report errors, or the user asks about build or test failures.'

Include common trigger term variations such as 'CI', 'CI/CD', 'pipeline', 'build failure', 'GitHub Actions', 'test failures', 'status checks' to improve matching.

Specify the context more clearly (e.g., GitHub PRs vs. GitLab MRs) to reduce conflict risk with other code review or debugging skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Find failing PR checks', 'inspect logs or external check links', and 'apply focused fixes'. These are distinct, actionable capabilities.

3 / 3

Completeness

Describes what the skill does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2, and since the 'when' is entirely absent, this scores at 1.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms like 'PR checks', 'logs', 'failing', and 'fixes', but misses common user variations such as 'CI', 'pipeline', 'build failure', 'GitHub Actions', 'CI/CD', or 'test failures' that users would naturally say.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The mention of 'PR checks' and 'external check links' provides some specificity to CI/PR workflows, but could overlap with general debugging, code review, or git-related skills without clearer scoping.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
cursor/plugins
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.