CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

issue-triage

Queries and triages open GitHub issues that need attention. Helps identify issues needing milestones, labels, or investigation.

58

Quality

73%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/issue-triage/SKILL.md
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 operational skill: fully executable commands, an explicit human-approval checkpoint on every triage decision, and verified bundled scripts with accurate parameter documentation. Its main weaknesses are redundancy — the core "use the scripts, never ad-hoc queries" rule is repeated in four places including a duplicative Common Mistakes table — and no verification step after applying a triage decision.

Suggestions

State the "always use the skill scripts, never ad-hoc GitHub queries" rule once in a single prominent place and remove the repetitions in Step 2, Step 6, and the Common Mistakes table.

Drop or shrink the Common Mistakes table, which restates the inline DON'T blocks nearly verbatim, to reclaim token budget.

Add a verification/feedback step after applying a decision, e.g., confirm the gh issue edit succeeded and re-check the milestone name against session output before moving to the next issue.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Most content is genuinely skill-specific (script paths, exclusion filters, milestone logic) that Claude cannot know, but the "never use ad-hoc queries / always use the scripts" rule is repeated roughly four times (the CRITICAL banner, Step 2's MANDATORY and DON'T blocks, Step 6's DON'T list, and the Common Mistakes table), and the Common Mistakes table restates the inline DON'Ts nearly verbatim — matching anchor 3's "mostly efficient but could be tightened" rather than anchor 2, since no space is spent teaching Claude things it already knows.

3 / 5

Actionability

The body provides copy-paste-ready commands throughout — "pwsh .github/skills/issue-triage/scripts/query-issues.ps1 -Limit 50 -OutputFormat triage", "gh issue edit ISSUE_NUMBER --repo dotnet/maui --milestone \"Backlog\"", a complete issue-presentation template, and a parameter table whose entries (Platform, Area, Limit, Skip, OutputFormat, RequireAreaLabel, SkipDetails) all match the actual bundled script — fully executable and covering the common cases, matching anchor 5.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The six-step sequence (init → query → present one → wait for decision → next → auto-reload with -Skip) is clearly ordered, and every mutation is gated on explicit user approval (Step 4) with a "NEVER guess or assume milestone names" pre-validation against session output, satisfying the batch-operation validation requirement; the gap keeping it at anchor 4 rather than 5 is the absence of post-edit verification or error recovery (e.g., what to do when gh issue edit fails on an invalid milestone name), and the apply commands live outside the step sequence.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

All three referenced scripts (init-triage-session.ps1, query-issues.ps1, record-triage.ps1) exist in the bundled scripts/ directory, one level deep and clearly signaled with full runnable commands, and sections are well-organized; minor gaps are the two references pointing outside the skill bundle ([issue-triage-labels](../issue-triage-labels/SKILL.md) and [command documentation](../../docs/issue-triage.md)) which cannot be verified within the bundle, matching anchor 4 rather than anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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 specific to the GitHub issue-triage domain with decent natural keywords, but it answers only "what" and not "when" — no explicit trigger guidance exists, capping completeness. Adding a "Use when..." clause with concrete trigger phrases (e.g., triage, groom the backlog, assign milestones) would lift both completeness and trigger-term coverage.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., "Use when the user asks to triage or groom GitHub issues, or wants to assign milestones, labels, or prioritization to open issues."

Include natural synonyms users might say — "backlog", "grooming", "bug reports" — to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Replace the filler "that need attention" with distinct concrete capabilities (suggest milestones, apply labels, flag regressions) to sharpen specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Queries and triages open GitHub issues" names the domain with a couple of actions, and "milestones, labels, or investigation" enumerates concrete outcomes, but "queries" and "triages" blur into one activity and "that need attention" is vague filler — closer to anchor 3 ("names domain and 1-2 concrete actions") than anchor 4's several distinct crisp actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description clearly answers "what" ("Queries and triages open GitHub issues... identify issues needing milestones, labels, or investigation") but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines; anchor 3 ("clear 'what', 'when' missing") is the exact fit.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"GitHub issues", "triages", "milestones", and "labels" are natural terms users would say when invoking this skill, matching anchor 4's good coverage; common synonyms like "backlog", "grooming", or "bug reports" are missing, keeping it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"GitHub issues", "milestones", and "labels" carve out a fairly distinct triage niche unlikely to trigger general document or code skills; there is minor overlap risk with closely related GitHub-management skills (e.g., the sibling issue-triage-labels skill), matching anchor 4 rather than anchor 5's minimal-conflict bar.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

dotnet/maui

Path

.github/skills/issue-triage/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.