CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

oma-dev-workflow

Use when setting up or optimizing developer workflows in a monorepo, managing mise tasks, git hooks, CI/CD pipelines, database migrations, or release automation. Invoke for development environment setup, build automation, testing workflows, and release coordination.

61

Quality

72%

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 ./benchmarks/runs/oma/.agents/skills/oma-dev-workflow/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

56%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 skill has a strong executable core — real mise commands, task syntax, dependency examples, and a troubleshooting table with validation and recovery steps — but it is wrapped in verbose agent-spec scaffolding (SSL primitive tables, resource scopes, keyword dumps, triplicated workflows) and references six resource files that are not present in the bundle. Consolidating the redundant structure and shipping (or removing) the referenced files would substantially improve it.

Suggestions

Collapse the three overlapping process descriptions ("Entry", "Scenes PREPARE–FINALIZE", "How to Execute") into a single workflow, and delete the non-actionable scaffolding ("Actions | SSL primitive" table, "Resource scope" table, "Knowledge Reference" keyword list) — this would move conciseness toward lean.

Ship the six referenced `resources/*.md` files in the bundle or remove the Reference Guide table and `../_shared/*` references; dangling references break navigation and force the detail (validation pipeline, migration patterns, release coordination) to remain inlined.

Deduplicate the 24 guardrails (e.g., #1/#15 and #8/#22 repeat each other) and trim known-concept content such as the generic environment-variable examples, keeping only monorepo-specific guidance.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The 340-line body carries substantial padding: an "Actions | SSL primitive" abstraction table, a "Resource scope" table, a keyword-dump "Knowledge Reference" section, guardrails #1 and #15 that duplicate each other verbatim, env-var examples Claude already knows, and three overlapping process descriptions ("Entry", "Scenes", "How to Execute"). Not 1 because the core mise command guidance is genuinely useful rather than concept explanation.

2 / 5

Actionability

Concrete executable commands throughout: `mise run //apps/api:dev`, `mise tasks --all`, `mise install`, a TOML `depends = ["lint", "test"]` example, and troubleshooting rows like "Find process: `lsof -ti:PORT` then kill". Not 5 because the abstract scaffolding sections are non-executable and concrete coverage of migrations/i18n/release — major claimed capabilities — is thin, with the detail deferred to unshipped resource files.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Validation checkpoints are explicit ("VERIFY: Check exit codes, generated artifacts, logs, and CI compatibility") and an error-recovery loop exists (missing task → `mise tasks --all`; missing runtime → `mise install`; destructive task → confirmation). Not 3 because checkpoints are explicit rather than implicit; not 5 because three competing step sequences (Entry, Scenes, How to Execute) partially conflict about which flow to follow.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The "Reference Guide" table with a "When to Load" column is well-signaled, one-level-deep referencing, but the six referenced `resources/*.md` files and `../_shared/core/*` files are absent from the bundle — navigation points at files that don't exist — while content that belongs in them (troubleshooting table, task patterns, env vars) is inlined in a 340-line SKILL.md. Not 4 because dangling references plus inlined content exceed "minor organization gaps".

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

88%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 description: third-person, concise, with an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and a comprehensive enumeration of concrete capabilities anchored to a distinct mise/monorepo niche. The only weaknesses are a few missing natural synonyms (dev server, lint, build) and minor overlap risk with database and CI-related skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates multiple concrete capabilities — "managing mise tasks, git hooks, CI/CD pipelines, database migrations, or release automation" plus "development environment setup, build automation, testing workflows, and release coordination" — comprehensively covering the skill's domain. Anchor 4 doesn't fit because there are no notable coverage gaps in the enumerated actions.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the "what" is concrete (setting up/optimizing monorepo workflows and the enumerated artifacts) and the "when" opens with an explicit "Use when..." clause reinforced by "Invoke for...". Not 4 because the when-guidance is fully explicit with concrete trigger phrases rather than vague.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms users would say are well covered ("monorepo", "mise tasks", "git hooks", "CI/CD pipelines", "database migrations", "release automation"), but common variations like "dev server", "lint", "format", or "build the app" are missing from the description. Not 5 because synonym coverage is incomplete.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"monorepo" and "mise tasks" establish a clear niche, but "database migrations", "testing workflows", and "build automation" carry minor overlap risk with adjacent dev/DB skills (the body itself redirects schema design to a DB Agent). Not 5 because of that residual overlap; not 3 because the mise/monorepo framing is distinctly triggered.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

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
first-fluke/oh-my-agent
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.