CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

maintain-pr

Maintain and follow up on a single Docker documentation pull request that you own or are responsible for updating. Check CI and review feedback, fix actionable failures, push changes, reply to comments, and report status. Use for requests such as "babysit this PR", "check the status of my PR", "fix CI on my PR", or "address review comments on #500". Do not use for maintainer review of an incoming contribution; use review-pr for that.

70

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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 tight, executable maintenance workflow with concrete gh commands, a fix-reply loop, and a report template. The main gaps are a missing concrete GraphQL query for thread resolution and no explicit post-fix CI re-check.

Suggestions

Add a concrete GraphQL query example for fetching unresolved review-thread IDs and the resolve mutation, so the thread-resolution step is as copy-paste ready as the comment-reply step.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint after pushing a CI fix (re-run `gh pr checks` and only report success once CI passes), closing the workflow's feedback loop.

Trim the redundant negative-boundary sentence in the opening paragraph since the description already states it, and drop the inferable list of common close causes to tighten conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and assumes Claude's competence — no explanations of what a PR or CI is — with a few minor trims possible: the opening negative boundary partly duplicates the description and "Common causes include maintainer rejection, supersession, or automation" is inferable.

4 / 5

Actionability

Three copy-paste gh command blocks, a concrete POST endpoint for inline replies, and a report template make it mostly executable; the one gap is "Use GraphQL to retrieve unresolved review-thread IDs" which gives no concrete query.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-step sequence with a numbered validation sub-checklist (format/validate, commit, reply, resolve, re-request) and ownership checks before risky actions; the gap is no explicit re-verification that CI passes after a fix is pushed.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are needed: the single-purpose workflow is self-contained and well-organized into five clearly headed sections, with nothing inlined that belongs in a separate file.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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, specific description with concrete actions, natural trigger phrases, and an explicit boundary against the related review-pr skill. The only soft spot is trigger-term breadth, which lists four good phrases but few synonyms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "Check CI and review feedback, fix actionable failures, push changes, reply to comments, and report status" — giving comprehensive coverage of the maintenance task rather than just several with gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (the detailed maintenance actions) and when (concrete trigger phrases plus a negative boundary), matching the 5 anchor's clear dual answer with trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Provides four natural quoted triggers users would say ("babysit this PR", "check the status of my PR", "fix CI on my PR", "address review comments on #500"), but lacks the synonym/variation breadth the 5 anchor calls for.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Carves a clear niche — "a single Docker documentation pull request that you own" — and explicitly disambiguates from a sibling skill ("Do not use for maintainer review... use review-pr"), yielding minimal conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
docker/docs
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.