CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

review-and-ship

Review the current branch for bugs, intent fit, and test coverage; run or write tests; commit focused work; open or update a PR.

58

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./cursor-team-kit/skills/review-and-ship/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.

This is a well-structured, concise skill that covers the review-and-ship workflow at an appropriate level of abstraction. Its main weakness is that several workflow steps are directional rather than fully actionable — the 'Suggested Checks' section provides concrete commands but the core workflow steps could benefit from more specific commands and explicit validation gates.

Suggestions

Add concrete git/gh commands for key workflow steps (e.g., `git add -p`, `git commit -m '...'`, `gh pr create --fill`) to make the workflow fully executable rather than directional.

Add an explicit validation gate between steps 4 and 5, e.g., 'Only proceed to commit when all affected tests pass' to strengthen the feedback loop for this multi-step process.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is lean and efficient. Every section serves a purpose, there's no explanation of concepts Claude already knows (like what a PR is, how git works), and the content is tightly structured without padding.

3 / 3

Actionability

The workflow steps are clear but somewhat abstract — e.g., 'Use parallel subagents for larger diffs' and 'Review for correctness, regressions, security' are directional rather than concrete. The 'Suggested Checks' section provides executable commands, but the core workflow lacks specific commands or code for key steps like committing, pushing, and opening/updating a PR.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 6-step workflow is clearly sequenced and includes a validation checkpoint (step 4: fix and re-run tests). However, there's no explicit feedback loop for what happens if tests fail after fixing, and the validation between steps is implicit rather than explicit (e.g., no 'only proceed when tests pass' gate).

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

For a skill of this size (~40 lines) with no need for external references, the content is well-organized into clear sections (Trigger, Workflow, Suggested Checks, Guardrails, Output) that are easy to scan and navigate.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

60%

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 concrete actions spanning a code review and submission workflow. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which limits Claude's ability to know precisely when to select this skill. The trigger terms are reasonable but could be more comprehensive with common user phrasings.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to review code, check for bugs, run tests, submit a PR, or prepare a branch for merge.'

Include common term variations users might say, such as 'pull request', 'code review', 'debug', 'unit tests', 'push changes', or 'merge request'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: review branch for bugs, check intent fit, check test coverage, run/write tests, commit focused work, open/update a PR.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what does this do' with specific actions, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance explaining when Claude should select this skill.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains some natural keywords like 'bugs', 'tests', 'PR', 'commit', and 'branch', but misses common variations users might say such as 'pull request', 'code review', 'test coverage', 'debug', or 'push changes'. The terms are somewhat embedded in action phrases rather than surfaced as explicit trigger terms.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The combination of code review, testing, committing, and PR management is somewhat distinctive as a workflow skill, but individual components like 'commit' or 'tests' could easily overlap with more focused skills for git operations, testing, or code review.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

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.