Automate ClickUp project management including tasks, spaces, folders, lists, comments, and team operations via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
75
65%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
92%
1.67xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/clickup-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 identifying ClickUp as the target platform and listing concrete entities it manages. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which would help Claude know exactly when to select this skill. The trigger terms are decent but could include more natural user language variations beyond the ClickUp-specific entity names.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about ClickUp tasks, project tracking, task assignments, or managing ClickUp workspaces.'
Include more natural user-facing trigger terms like 'project tracking', 'assign tasks', 'due dates', 'task status', 'workspace management' to improve keyword coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions and entities: tasks, spaces, folders, lists, comments, and team operations. Also specifies the platform (ClickUp) and integration method (Rube MCP/Composio). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (automate ClickUp project management across various entities), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The operational note about searching tools first is helpful but doesn't substitute for trigger guidance. Per rubric, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good keywords like 'ClickUp', 'tasks', 'spaces', 'folders', 'lists', 'comments', and 'team operations', but misses common user variations like 'project tracking', 'task management', 'assign tasks', 'due dates', or 'workspace'. 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is technical jargon unlikely to be used by end users. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific mention of 'ClickUp' and 'Rube MCP (Composio)'. Unlikely to conflict with other project management or generic task skills because of the clear platform and integration specificity. | 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 well-structured API integration skill with clear workflow sequences, good pitfall documentation, and useful quick reference material. Its main weaknesses are redundancy across sections (pitfalls repeated in workflows and in the dedicated section) and the lack of concrete invocation examples showing actual tool calls with sample data. The content would benefit from deduplication and at least one end-to-end example with realistic parameter values.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete end-to-end example showing actual tool calls with realistic parameter values (e.g., creating a task with specific list_id, name, status, due_date) to improve actionability.
Deduplicate pitfalls—keep the detailed 'Known Pitfalls' section and reduce inline pitfalls in each workflow to only workflow-specific warnings, with a cross-reference to the main section.
Consider extracting the Quick Reference table and detailed parameter lists into a separate REFERENCE.md file to improve progressive disclosure and reduce the main file length.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly comprehensive but includes some redundancy—pitfalls are repeated across individual workflows and then again in the 'Known Pitfalls' section (e.g., millisecond timestamps, case-sensitive status, team_id meaning). The quick reference table also largely duplicates information from the workflow sections. Some trimming would improve token efficiency. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides specific tool names, parameter lists, and clear sequences, which is good. However, there are no concrete executable examples showing actual tool calls with sample parameters/payloads. Everything remains at the level of 'call this tool with these params' without showing a complete invocation example with realistic values. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step workflows are clearly sequenced with numbered steps, labeled as [Required], [Optional], [Prerequisite]. Validation checkpoints are present (e.g., verify connection is ACTIVE before proceeding, use GET_LIST to validate statuses before creating tasks, verify task exists before commenting). The ID resolution pattern and pagination handling provide good feedback loops. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear sections and headers, but it's a monolithic ~200-line document with no bundle files to offload detailed reference material. The quick reference table, detailed pitfalls, and per-workflow parameter documentation could be split into separate reference files. However, given no bundle exists, the single-file organization is reasonable though lengthy. | 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 | |
74c7031
Table of Contents
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.