new-branch-and-pr

Create a fresh branch, complete work, and open a pull request

Quality

37%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

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/new-branch-and-pr/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

32%

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 captures a git workflow at a high level but suffers from the vague phrase 'complete work' which undermines specificity and distinctiveness. It lacks a 'Use when...' clause, making it harder for Claude to know when to select this skill. Adding explicit trigger terms and clarifying what 'complete work' entails would significantly improve it.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'when the user asks to implement a feature, fix a bug, or make changes via a pull request/PR'.

Replace 'complete work' with specific actions such as 'implement code changes', 'make edits', or 'apply fixes' to improve specificity.

Include common keyword variations like 'PR', 'merge request', 'feature branch', 'git workflow' to improve trigger term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names three specific actions (create branch, complete work, open PR), but 'complete work' is vague and the description lacks detail about what kind of work or how it's done.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what at a high level but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also weak due to the vague 'complete work' phrase, bringing this to 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms like 'branch', 'pull request' that users would say, but misses common variations like 'PR', 'merge request', 'git', or 'feature branch'. 'Complete work' is too generic to serve as a trigger term.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of branch creation + PR opening is somewhat distinctive for a git workflow skill, but 'complete work' is so broad it could overlap with many other skills. It's not clearly distinguished from a general git skill or a code editing skill.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

42%

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

This skill provides a reasonable high-level outline of a branch-and-PR workflow but lacks the concrete, executable commands that would make it actionable. It reads more like a checklist of intentions than a skill Claude can follow precisely. The structure is clean but the substance is insufficient—specific git and gh CLI commands, example branch names, and example PR bodies would dramatically improve it.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable commands for each step (e.g., `git checkout main && git pull`, `git checkout -b feat/description`, `gh pr create --title '...' --body '...'`).

Include a concrete example showing a sample branch name, commit message, and PR body to make the output expectations clear.

Add a validation checkpoint after pushing (e.g., verify the branch exists on remote, verify CI passes) before creating the PR.

Specify the exact tool/CLI expected (e.g., `gh` CLI for GitHub) so Claude knows which commands to use.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is relatively brief and doesn't over-explain concepts Claude knows, but it's also quite vague—its brevity comes from lack of substance rather than efficient information density. Phrases like 'Ensure the working tree is clean or explicitly handled' add little value.	2 / 3
Actionability	There are no concrete commands (e.g., `git checkout -b`, `git push`, `gh pr create`), no executable code, and no specific examples. Every step is abstract direction rather than actionable instruction.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps are listed in a logical sequence, but there are no validation checkpoints, no error recovery guidance, and no concrete commands. For a workflow involving git operations (potentially destructive), the lack of verification steps is a notable gap.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a simple, short skill with no bundle files, the content is appropriately organized into clear sections (Trigger, Workflow, Guardrails, Output) without unnecessary nesting or references.	3 / 3
	Total	8 / 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: 7dd9fea

Reviewed: about 22 hours 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.