CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

what-did-i-get-done

Summarize authored commits over a user-specified time period into a concise update

59

Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./cursor-team-kit/skills/what-did-i-get-done/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is concise, well-structured, and clearly sequenced for a simple read-only task, scoring high on conciseness, workflow clarity, and organization. The only weakness is actionability: it describes intent without giving the concrete git commands that would make the steps copy-paste ready.

Suggestions

Add concrete executable git commands for the key steps, e.g. the author/date filter such as `git log --author="$(git config user.email)" --since=... --until=... --no-merges`, to move actionability toward anchor 3.

Optionally note how to determine the current user email (`git config user.email`) so the author filter is unambiguous.

Clarify step 1 ("Resolve the requested time window into concrete dates") with a brief example of mapping relative phrases like "last week" to --since/--until dates.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and information-dense (Trigger, Workflow, Guardrails, Output) and assumes Claude's knowledge of git without explaining what commits are, so every token earns its place per anchor 3.

3 / 3

Actionability

The steps convey concrete intent ("commits authored by the current git user email", "Exclude merge commits and uncommitted changes") but provide no executable git commands or examples, leaving key details missing per anchor 2 rather than copy-paste-ready anchor 3.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-step sequence is given and the task is read-only summarization, so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply; step 5 ("Include the actual date range used") acts as a soft checkpoint, reaching anchor 3.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references and is organized into clearly labeled sections, which per the guidelines lets progressive disclosure score 3 on well-organized sections alone.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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 is clear and concrete about what the skill does but lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and broad natural keyword coverage, leaving every dimension at the mid-anchor. Adding a usage trigger would lift completeness and trigger_term_quality together.

Suggestions

Append a "Use when..." trigger clause naming natural user phrasings, e.g. "Use when the user asks what they got done, for a standup, or for a status update over a time range like yesterday or last week."

Broaden natural trigger terms ("what did I get done", "status update", "standup", "weekly summary") to improve keyword coverage and distinctiveness.

Name a second concrete action (e.g. "filter by author and date range") to move specificity toward the multi-action anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Summarize authored commits over a user-specified time period" names the domain and one concrete action, but does not list multiple distinct concrete actions, so it stops at anchor 2 rather than reaching the multi-action anchor 3.

2 / 3

Completeness

The what is explicit ("Summarize authored commits ... into a concise update") but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

"authored commits" and "time period" are relevant natural terms, but the description omits common user phrasings like "what did I get done", "status update", or "standup", so coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"authored commits ... into a concise update" carves out a niche, but without explicit triggers it could still overlap with general git-log summarization skills, so it is somewhat specific rather than clearly distinct.

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.

Validation16 / 16 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.