fix-merge-conflicts

Resolve merge conflicts non-interactively, validate build and tests, and finalize conflict resolution

Quality

61%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./cursor-team-kit/skills/fix-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

72%

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

This is a concise, well-structured skill that clearly communicates the merge conflict resolution workflow. Its main weakness is the lack of concrete, executable commands and examples—the guidance reads more like a checklist of principles than copy-paste-ready instructions. Adding specific git commands and a feedback loop for failed builds would significantly improve it.

Suggestions

Add concrete git commands for conflict detection (e.g., `git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U`, `grep -rl '<<<<<<<' .`) and resolution staging (`git add <file>`).

Include an explicit feedback loop after step 5: if build/tests fail, diagnose which resolution caused the failure, fix, and re-run validation before proceeding.

Add a brief concrete example showing a before/after of a resolved conflict marker to make the 'prefer preserving both sides' guidance actionable.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Every line earns its place. No unnecessary explanations of what merge conflicts are or how git works. The content assumes Claude's competence and stays lean throughout.	3 / 3
Actionability	The workflow provides clear steps but lacks concrete commands (e.g., specific git commands like `git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U`, or how to detect conflict markers with `grep -rl '<<<<<<<'`). Guidance is directional rather than executable.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps are logically sequenced and include a build/test validation step (step 5), but there is no explicit feedback loop for what to do if the build or tests fail after resolution. For a destructive/complex operation like merge conflict resolution, the absence of a retry/fix loop caps this at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a simple, focused 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 and navigate.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 articulates specific capabilities around merge conflict resolution with build validation, establishing a distinct niche. However, it critically lacks any 'Use when...' guidance, which would help Claude know when to select this skill from a large pool. Adding trigger terms and explicit usage conditions would significantly improve its effectiveness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause such as 'Use when the user encounters merge conflicts, asks to resolve git conflicts, or needs help after a failed merge or rebase.'

Include additional natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'git merge', 'rebase conflicts', 'conflict markers', '<<<<<<', or '.orig files'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'resolve merge conflicts non-interactively', 'validate build and tests', and 'finalize conflict resolution'. These are clear, 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 a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'merge conflicts', 'build', and 'tests', but misses common user variations such as 'git merge', 'conflict markers', 'rebase conflicts', '<<<<<<', or 'resolve conflicts in files'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of 'merge conflicts non-interactively' with build/test validation creates a clear, distinct niche that is unlikely to conflict with general git skills or testing skills.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: cursor/plugins
Commit: cfd81b3

Reviewed: 3 days 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.