CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

make-github-actions-workflow

Create or modify GitHub Actions workflows for CI, automation, or PR management. Use when asked to create, scaffold, add, extend, or fix a workflow (.yml file under .github/workflows/), including existing pull-request policy and comment automation.

72

Quality

90%

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

75%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.

The body is a strong, dense, repository-specific guide: concrete conventions, pinned action versions, thoughtful pull_request_target security policy, and executable JavaScript patterns. The main gaps are minor: a few generic GitHub Actions explanations that could be trimmed, a placeholder-based template instead of a filled example, checklist-only validation without an automated feedback loop, and all content inlined in one file. Scores sit solidly at level 4 across dimensions.

Suggestions

Conciseness: trim generic rows of the trigger table (cron syntax, workflow_dispatch inputs) and the general GitHub doc links, keeping only the repo-specific notes (e.g., the app.slug filter and pull_request_target: [closed] guidance).

Workflow clarity: add an automated validation checkpoint such as running `actionlint` on the new workflow file, with a fix-and-re-validate loop before considering the task done.

Progressive disclosure: move long code patterns (e.g., the idempotent bot-comment update) into a references/ file and link to it from a brief inline note, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The bulk is high-value, non-derivable material: repo-specific conventions ("Use `actions/github-script@v8`", "use `pull_request_target` instead of `pull_request`", detailed `edited`/actor/author guard rules). Minor over-explanation remains: generic trigger-table rows ("Manual trigger | `workflow_dispatch` | Add `inputs:` for parameters", "Scheduled | `schedule` | Use cron syntax") and links to general GitHub docs restate knowledge Claude already has. Not level 3: the padding is minor and localized, not a broad unnecessary-explanation problem.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, copy-paste JavaScript patterns cover the common cases (commenting on a PR, checking collaborator permissions, idempotent bot-comment updates with `github.paginate`, reading files at a commit), and the security guidance is specific. The YAML template uses placeholders ("<trigger_event>", "<resource>: <read|write>"), which is appropriate for a generic template but keeps it slightly short of fully copy-paste ready. Not level 5: the template row for permissions and triggers still requires assembly from placeholders rather than a filled worked example.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-step sequence (understand requirements → choose trigger → write → guard conditions → validate) with checklists at steps 1 and 5 covering security ("No secrets or tokens are hardcoded", "Workflow doesn't create infinite loops"). Not level 5: the validate step is a manual checklist with no automated verification (e.g., a YAML lint such as actionlint) and no explicit fix-and-re-validate feedback loop for workflows that can act destructively on PRs.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single SKILL.md is well-sectioned with clear headers (Repository Conventions, Workflow, Common Patterns, References) and only one-level-deep external links; navigation is easy. Not level 5: at ~215 lines with no bundle files, some content (the long idempotent-comment-update pattern, the per-event guard rules) is inlined where a references/ file would keep the overview leaner; the under-50-line simple-skill exception does not apply.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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.

The description is an exemplary two-part structure: a concrete 'what' statement followed by an explicit 'Use when' clause with multiple natural trigger verbs and the exact file location. It is third-person, concise, comprehensive, and highly distinctive. No improvements needed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Create or modify GitHub Actions workflows for CI, automation, or PR management" plus "create, scaffold, add, extend, or fix a workflow" and "pull-request policy and comment automation" lists multiple concrete actions covering the full workflow lifecycle comprehensively. Not level 4: there are no meaningful gaps in the action coverage for this domain.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ("Create or modify GitHub Actions workflows for CI, automation, or PR management") and when ("Use when asked to create, scaffold, add, extend, or fix a workflow (.yml file under .github/workflows/)"). Both halves are concrete with explicit trigger phrases, matching the level-5 anchor; level 4 would require the 'when' clause to be less explicit.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would actually say ("fix a workflow", "create... a workflow", "CI") appear alongside synonyms (create/scaffold/add/extend/fix) and the concrete file location ".yml file under .github/workflows/". This matches the comprehensive synonym-and-extension coverage of the level-5 anchor rather than the few-missing-terms profile of level 4.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"GitHub Actions workflows" and ".yml file under .github/workflows/" define a clear niche with distinct triggers, minimal overlap with any other skill. The description would not plausibly fire for a non-GitHub-Actions request, fitting the clear-niche level-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

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

dotnet/efcore

Path

.agents/skills/make-github-actions-workflow/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.