helpdesk-automation
Automate HelpDesk tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): list tickets, manage views, use canned responses, and configure custom fields. Always search tools first for current schemas.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:davepoon/buildwithclaude --skill helpdesk-automation68
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 97%
↑ 2.69xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
42%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 effectively lists specific HelpDesk automation capabilities and mentions the integration platform (Rube MCP/Composio). However, it critically lacks any 'Use when...' guidance to help Claude know when to select this skill, and the trigger terms could be expanded to include more natural user language variations.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers like 'Use when the user asks about support tickets, help desk automation, ticket management, or mentions Composio/Rube MCP.'
Include common user language variations such as 'support tickets', 'customer support', 'ticket system', 'help desk' (two words) to improve trigger term coverage.
Consider specifying which HelpDesk platform this integrates with (e.g., Zendesk, Freshdesk) to further distinguish from other potential ticketing skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'list tickets, manage views, use canned responses, and configure custom fields.' These are clear, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does well but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance. The rubric states missing trigger guidance should cap completeness at 2, and this has no when guidance at all. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'HelpDesk', 'tickets', 'views', 'canned responses', 'custom fields', but missing common variations users might say like 'support tickets', 'ticket system', 'customer support', or 'help desk' (two words). | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Mentions specific platform 'Rube MCP (Composio)' and HelpDesk-specific terms which help distinguish it, but 'tickets' and 'views' could overlap with other ticketing or project management skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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 skill provides solid structural organization and clear workflows for HelpDesk automation, with good coverage of setup prerequisites and common pitfalls. However, it lacks concrete executable examples (actual tool calls with real parameters) and contains some redundancy in explaining cursor pagination across multiple sections. The content would benefit from consolidating repeated information and adding copy-paste ready examples.
Suggestions
Add concrete tool invocation examples showing actual parameter values, e.g., a complete HELPDESK_LIST_TICKETS call with silo='tickets', sortBy='createdAt', pageSize=20
Consolidate cursor pagination explanation into a single authoritative section rather than repeating across 'Pitfalls', 'Common Patterns', and 'Known Pitfalls'
Consider moving the detailed 'Known Pitfalls' section to a separate PITFALLS.md file and keeping only critical warnings inline
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy—pitfalls are repeated across sections (cursor pagination explained multiple times), and some explanations like 'Views are predefined saved filters' state the obvious. Could be tightened by consolidating repeated information. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides tool names and parameter lists, but lacks executable code examples. The 'Common Patterns' section uses pseudocode-style numbered steps rather than actual API call examples with concrete parameter values. No copy-paste ready examples showing actual tool invocations. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequential workflows with explicit steps for each task. Setup includes validation checkpoint (confirm ACTIVE status before proceeding). The ticket browsing pattern clearly shows the pagination loop with termination condition. Rate limit handling with backoff is mentioned. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's somewhat monolithic. The detailed pitfalls and patterns could be split into separate reference files. External link to Composio docs is good, but no internal file references for advanced topics. | 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 | |
- 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.