CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

what-did-i-get-done

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

57

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

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.

The body is concise and well-structured for a simple skill, but it stops short of executable commands and lacks validation checkpoints for a batch git-history operation, capping actionability and workflow clarity at 2.

Suggestions

Add the concrete git command used to read commits (e.g., 'git log --author="<email>" --since="<start>" --until="<end>" --no-merges') to make guidance copy-paste ready.

Insert a validation checkpoint after resolving the time window and after reading commits (e.g., confirm the author email matched at least one commit before synthesizing).

Optionally show how to obtain the current git user email ('git config user.email') since the workflow depends on it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and information-dense with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; lines like 'Be extremely concise and information-dense' and 'Omit cosmetic-only changes' earn their place.

3 / 3

Actionability

Concrete filters ('commits authored by the current git user email', 'Exclude merge commits and uncommitted changes') are specific, but no executable git commands (e.g., git log --author --since --no-merges) are provided, stopping short of copy-paste-ready guidance.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step numbered sequence is present, but this batch analysis over git history lacks any validation checkpoint (e.g., confirming the window resolved or that matching commits were found), which caps workflow clarity at 2 per the rubric notes.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A simple, well-organized skill under 50 lines with clear Trigger/Workflow/Guardrails/Output sections and no need for external references, satisfying the simple-skills exception for a top score.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

57%

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 specific and distinctive, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger and covers only partial natural keyword variations, capping completeness and trigger quality at 2.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause (e.g., 'Use when the user asks what they got done over a day, week, or custom range') to lift completeness to 3.

Include natural trigger phrasings users would say, such as 'status update', 'what did I get done', or 'weekly/daily report', to improve trigger term coverage.

Optionally enumerate concrete sub-actions (e.g., read commits, filter merges, summarize shipped changes) to reach the multiple-specific-actions bar for specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names a concrete action ('Summarize authored commits') with clear input ('user-specified time period') and output ('concise update'), but states only one core action rather than the multiple specific actions of the score-3 anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what' but provides no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger; the 'when' is only implied, which caps completeness at 2 per the rubric guidelines.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords ('commits', 'time period', 'summary', 'update') but omits common user phrasings like 'what did I get done', 'status update', or 'weekly report', so coverage of natural terms is partial.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (authored commits within a time window synthesized into a status update) with concrete, distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 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.

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.