fix-gh-actions

Investigate and fix failing GitHub Actions checks for this repo or its PRs. Use when the user asks to debug CI failures, broken workflows, failed release jobs, or failing GitHub checks.

Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

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.

The body is a tight, well-structured workflow with a clear sequence and validation step, and it stays appropriately lean. Its main gap is actionability: it tells Claude what to inspect without giving the concrete commands or reproduction approach to do it.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 concrete commands for the common inspection/reproduction steps (e.g. `gh run view --log-failed <run-id>` to read failed logs, or `act -j <job>` to reproduce locally) so step 1-3 are executable rather than directional.

Make the validation feedback loop explicit in step 5 — e.g. 'If validation still fails, return to step 2 and re-inspect' — to close the minor workflow-clarity gap.

Optionally name where to look first (the `.github/workflows/` directory and the failed job's step log) so 'Identify the failing workflow, job, and step' has a concrete starting point.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with no padding and assumes Claude's competence — every line (metadata use, the five-step workflow, the conditional handoff) earns its place, matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Steps name concrete artifacts ("workflow files, scripts, jq filters, and code paths") but provide no executable commands or examples for inspecting/reproducing (e.g. gh run view, act), leaving guidance high-level with missing key details — the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear five-step sequence with a validation checkpoint ("Re-run targeted validation and report residual risk"), but no explicit fix→retry feedback loop on validation failure, matching 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Under 50 lines with no need for external bundle references; the single conditional handoff to github-action-review is well-signaled and the body is cleanly organized into header + workflow + note, qualifying for the simple-skill top anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

82%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 concise, concrete, and explicitly pairs a clear 'what' with a natural 'Use when...' trigger clause. Its only weakness is specificity breadth — it states the high-level actions without enumerating the range of fix activities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("GitHub Actions checks") and two concrete actions ("Investigate and fix"), matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions but not comprehensive' anchor; it does not enumerate the breadth of fix activities that would warrant a 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ("Investigate and fix failing GitHub Actions checks for this repo or its PRs") and when ("Use when the user asks to debug CI failures, broken workflows, failed release jobs, or failing GitHub checks") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Strong natural coverage with "CI failures, broken workflows, failed release jobs, or failing GitHub checks" — phrases users genuinely say — but a few synonyms/extensions (e.g. .github/workflows, YAML) are absent, so it sits at good-but-not-comprehensive.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear GitHub-Actions-specific niche with distinct triggers, making conflict with unrelated skills unlikely; matches the 'clear niche with minimal conflict risk' anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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: fallow-rs/fallow
Path: .agents/skills/fix-gh-actions/SKILL.md
Commit: 03aad8c

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.