CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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.

76

2.69x
Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

97%

2.69x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/all-skills/skills/helpdesk-automation/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A well-structured, highly actionable reference for four read-only HelpDesk tools, with exact slugs, parameters, and an explicit connection-check checkpoint. Its weaknesses are systematic repetition of pagination and silo details across three sections, and a monolithic single-file layout with no progressive disclosure for per-tool detail.

Suggestions

Consolidate cursor-pagination guidance into one section — it currently appears in workflow 1's pitfalls, 'Common Patterns', and 'Known Pitfalls' with overlapping content.

Split each workflow's 'Key parameters' and 'Pitfalls' into per-tool reference files (e.g., references/tickets.md) and keep SKILL.md as a lean overview with the Quick Reference table.

Remove pitfalls lines that merely restate parameter defaults (e.g., 'pageSize max is 100; default is 20') already documented under 'Key parameters'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly dense domain-specific API detail, but cursor-based pagination is explained three separate times (workflow 1 pitfalls, 'Common Patterns', 'Known Pitfalls') and silo/parameter defaults are restated verbatim in 'Ticket Folder Navigation' and the pitfalls sections. It is duplicated fact rather than generic filler Claude already knows, so it sits above 2 but the systematic repetition keeps it below 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Gives concrete, executable guidance throughout: exact tool slugs (HELPDESK_LIST_TICKETS), parameter names, defaults, and enumerated values, plus a complete pagination loop pattern. Not fully copy-paste ready since no example tool-call payload is shown (the call format is deferred to RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Setup steps 1-4 include an explicit validation checkpoint ('Confirm connection status shows ACTIVE before running any workflows') and the browsing pattern is a complete sequence. Missing error-recovery detail beyond 'Implement backoff on 429 responses'; no destructive/batch operations, so no validation cap applies.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are clearly organized, but the ~165-line body inlines all four workflows' parameter and pitfall detail with no reference files at all; the under-50-line simple-skill exception does not apply, and the per-tool detail could be split into separate reference files.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

66%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A specific, well-anchored description that names four concrete capabilities in a distinct niche. Its main weaknesses are the absence of any explicit 'when to use' trigger clause and missing natural synonym coverage (e.g., 'support tickets', 'customer support').

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user wants to browse, list, or manage support/helpdesk tickets, saved views, or canned responses.'

Include natural synonyms such as 'support tickets' and 'customer support' so users' phrasing matches the description.

Soften 'manage views' and 'configure custom fields' to 'list views' and 'inspect custom fields' to match the toolkit's actual read-only operations.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists four concrete actions ('list tickets, manage views, use canned responses, and configure custom fields'), giving several specific capabilities, but 'manage' and 'configure' slightly over-claim write access the skill body itself disclaims, leaving minor gaps versus comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clearly stated, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance — 'Always search tools first for current schemas' is usage instruction, not a trigger — which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes good natural keywords users would say ('tickets', 'canned responses', 'custom fields', 'HelpDesk') anchored by 'Rube MCP (Composio)', but misses common variations like 'support tickets', 'customer support', or 'reply templates'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Composio/Rube MCP anchoring plus helpdesk-specific terms give it a distinct niche, but 'HelpDesk' and 'tickets' alone could overlap with other generic ticketing/support skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
davepoon/buildwithclaude
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.