CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

validate-release-green

Run or inspect the local Release-Green observer for an exact base or combined PR candidate, separating hard failures, advisory drift and incomplete evidence. Use for maintainer preflight; full CI acceptance remains a separate requirement.

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%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.

An unusually disciplined instruction-only skill: terse, fully operational commands, a clearly sequenced diagnostic workflow with repeated evidence-validation checkpoints, and an explicit handoff contract with scope boundaries. The two gaps are minor: the report-verifier invocation is described rather than shown, and the one external reference (../_shared/base-green.md) lives outside the bundle and cannot be confirmed to exist.

Suggestions

Show one concrete invocation of scripts/ci/release-green-result.mjs (arguments, expected output) instead of only describing its contract, so the verification step is copy-paste executable.

Either bundle the shared base-green guidance as a reference file inside the skill (e.g. references/base-green.md) or inline the few rules from ../_shared/base-green.md that this skill depends on, so the skill is self-contained and the reference can be verified.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and dense throughout: no background concept is explained, every sentence is operational ('Build in a worktree with physical dependencies, never an external node_modules symlink. Preserve stdout/stderr, process receipts and the validator's own exit.'), and boundaries are stated once without padding. Fully matches anchor 5's 'every token earns its place'.

5 / 5

Actionability

Includes copy-paste commands ('npm run check:release-green -- --quick', '--full-ci --with-build --hermetic --json'), concrete script paths, and a specific handoff field list. Falls short of anchor 5 because the report verifier's usage is described but never shown ('use scripts/ci/release-green-result.mjs when available... supply the values from the run') and flag selection is delegated to 'Inspect scripts/quality/validate-release-green.mjs' rather than stated.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequenced workflow — read the shared base doc, resolve SHAs, isolate a worktree, select a profile, execute, interpret against the exact base, hand off — with explicit validation checkpoints throughout ('Read the report even when the outer job is green', 'Missing, contradictory, stale, cancelled or timed-out evidence cannot establish PASS', 'Re-query live refs before using the result for a later decision') and a concrete handoff checklist. The skill is diagnostic, not destructive, so no cap applies.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A ~52-line, well-sectioned single file whose only delegated reference ('Read ../_shared/base-green.md before interpreting remote status') is clearly signaled and one level deep. Not a 5: that reference sits outside the skill's own bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist alongside SKILL.md), so the essential shared guidance cannot be verified from the skill's structure — a minor organization gap against anchor 5's 'appropriately split' content.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 strong, appropriately terse description: it names a specific internal tool, lists concrete classification actions, and carries an explicit 'Use for maintainer preflight' clause with a clear boundary against full CI acceptance. The main residual weakness is trigger phrasing — the 'when' is role-based rather than phrased as natural user utterances, and common synonyms are missing.

Suggestions

Rephrase the 'when' clause around user utterances, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to check release-green status, preflight a PR before merge, or interpret a failed release-green run' rather than the role-based 'Use for maintainer preflight'.

Add natural synonyms for the tool's vocabulary ('green check', 'preflight validation', 'CI preflight') so the description matches more of the phrasings a user would actually say.

Name one or two of the observer's concrete checks (e.g. static scan, test suite, package validation) so the 'what' describes what running the observer actually covers, not just what it classifies.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete actions — 'Run or inspect the local Release-Green observer for an exact base or combined PR candidate, separating hard failures, advisory drift and incomplete evidence' — anchored to a specific named tool. Not a 5 because the observer's actual checks (static/test/package profile) are never named, leaving minor coverage gaps; clearly above anchor 3's '1-2 concrete actions'.

4 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the 'what' ('Run or inspect the local Release-Green observer... separating hard failures, advisory drift and incomplete evidence') and an explicit 'Use for maintainer preflight' clause that also draws the boundary ('full CI acceptance remains a separate requirement'). Not a 5 because the 'when' names a role/context rather than concrete user-utterance triggers like 'when the user mentions X or asks for Y'.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage for the intended audience: 'Release-Green observer', 'combined PR candidate', 'hard failures', 'advisory drift', 'maintainer preflight', 'CI acceptance'. Falls short of anchor 5 because natural synonyms and variations a user might say ('green check', 'preflight validation', 'release readiness') are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A named internal tool ('Release-Green observer') with a precise niche (local preflight of a base or combined PR candidate) and an explicit scope boundary; it would not plausibly trigger for any other skill, matching anchor 5's 'clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk'.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 2 missing, 2 deeper-than-1-level

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

diegosouzapw/OmniRoute

Path

config/quality/skill-templates/validate-release-green/SKILL.md

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.