weekly-review

Produce a weekly synthesis of authored commits with highlights by bugfix, tech debt, and net-new work

Quality

48%

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/weekly-review/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%

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

The skill is well-structured and concise, with clear sections and no unnecessary verbosity. However, it critically lacks actionability—there are no concrete git commands, no example output format, and no executable guidance. The workflow reads more like a high-level description than an instruction set Claude can follow precisely.

Suggestions

Add concrete git commands for each workflow step, e.g., `git log --author="$(git config user.email)" --since='7 days ago' --no-merges --pretty=format:'%h %s' main`

Include an example of the expected output format showing sample bullets and the classification paragraph so Claude knows exactly what to produce

Add a validation step after collecting commits (e.g., 'If no commits found, inform the user and stop') to handle edge cases

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is lean and efficient. Every section serves a purpose, there's no explanation of what git is or how commits work, and it respects Claude's intelligence throughout.	3 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides only abstract descriptions of steps ('collect authored commits', 'group meaningful changes') without any concrete git commands, code snippets, or example output. There are no executable commands like `git log --author=... --since=...` or example bullet formats.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps are listed in a logical sequence and there's a guardrail for missing git email, but there are no validation checkpoints (e.g., verifying the commit list looks correct before classifying), no concrete commands at each step, and no feedback loop for edge cases like empty commit histories.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For 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 navigate.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

40%

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 identifies a clear and distinctive niche—weekly commit synthesis categorized by work type—which helps it stand out from other skills. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which is critical for Claude to know when to select this skill. The trigger terms are somewhat narrow and miss common user phrasings for requesting this type of report.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'weekly report', 'commit summary', 'what did I work on', 'status update', 'standup notes', or 'changelog'.

Include common variations of how users might request this, such as 'git log summary', 'weekly recap', 'work summary', or 'progress report'.

Expand the 'what' slightly to mention inputs (e.g., 'Analyzes git commit history to produce...') so Claude understands the data source.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (weekly commit synthesis) and describes some actions (produce synthesis, highlights by category), but doesn't list multiple concrete actions beyond the single synthesis task. The categorization into bugfix, tech debt, and net-new work adds some specificity.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (produce a weekly synthesis of commits with categorized highlights) 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 the 'when' is entirely absent, warranting a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant keywords like 'commits', 'weekly', 'bugfix', 'tech debt', but misses common user variations like 'git log', 'weekly report', 'standup', 'status update', 'changelog', or 'summary'. Users might not naturally say 'weekly synthesis of authored commits'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of weekly cadence, commit-based analysis, and specific categorization (bugfix, tech debt, net-new work) creates a clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with other skills. This is quite distinctive.	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: 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.