circleci-automation
Automate CircleCI tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): trigger pipelines, monitor workflows/jobs, retrieve artifacts and test metadata. Always search tools first for current schemas.
76
65%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.44xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/circleci-automation/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
67%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 strong in specificity and distinctiveness, clearly naming concrete actions and a unique toolchain (CircleCI via Rube MCP). However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness, and the trigger terms lean toward internal/technical jargon rather than natural user language.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about CircleCI builds, CI/CD pipelines, build status, or deployment workflows.'
Include more natural user-facing trigger terms like 'CI/CD', 'build status', 'deploy', 'continuous integration', or 'build logs' to improve discoverability.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'trigger pipelines, monitor workflows/jobs, retrieve artifacts and test metadata.' Also includes a procedural instruction ('Always search tools first for current schemas'). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what does this do' with specific actions, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The 'when' is only implied by the domain context. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'CircleCI', 'pipelines', 'workflows', 'jobs', 'artifacts', and 'test metadata', but misses common user variations like 'CI/CD', 'build status', 'deploy', or 'continuous integration'. 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is internal jargon unlikely to be used by users. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific combination of 'CircleCI', 'Rube MCP (Composio)', and CI/CD-specific actions like triggering pipelines and retrieving artifacts. Unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid reference skill for CircleCI automation via MCP with clear workflow sequences and good structural organization. Its main weaknesses are redundancy across sections (project slug format and ID types repeated 3+ times) and the lack of concrete executable examples. The workflow clarity is strong with explicit tool ordering and prerequisite annotations.
Suggestions
Consolidate repeated information (project slug format, ID type distinctions) into the 'Known Pitfalls' or 'Common Patterns' section and reference it from workflows instead of restating it each time.
Add at least one concrete example invocation showing actual tool call parameters (e.g., a sample CIRCLECI_TRIGGER_PIPELINE call with realistic project_slug, branch, and parameters values).
Consider splitting the detailed workflow descriptions into a separate WORKFLOWS.md file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with the quick reference table and setup instructions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably well-structured but has notable redundancy. Pitfalls about project_slug format and ID types are repeated across multiple sections and again in the 'Known Pitfalls' section. The 'Pipeline -> Workflow -> Job Hierarchy' pattern repeats what's already covered in the core workflows. Some trimming would improve token efficiency. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides specific tool names, parameter names, and clear tool sequences, which is good. However, there are no executable code examples or copy-paste ready commands — everything is described at the level of tool names and parameter lists. For an MCP-based skill this is somewhat expected, but concrete example invocations with sample parameters would improve actionability. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Each workflow has a clear numbered sequence with prerequisite/required/optional annotations, explicit tool ordering, and pitfalls that serve as validation guidance. The setup section includes a verification step (confirm ACTIVE status before proceeding). The hierarchy pattern clearly shows the drill-down sequence. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-organized with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's quite long (~170 lines of substantive content) and could benefit from splitting detailed workflow descriptions or the pitfalls reference into separate files. The external link to Composio docs is good, but no internal file references are used for progressive disclosure. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- davepoon/buildwithclaude
- Commit
7cc63f3
- 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.