convert-github-issue-to-discussion
Convert GitHub issues to discussions using agent-browser. Use when asked to convert, move, or change an issue to a discussion. Requires agent-browser installed and user to log in via headed browser.
65
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./config/claude/skills/convert-github-issue-to-discussion/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-crafted description for a narrow-scope skill. It clearly states the action, provides explicit trigger guidance with natural keyword variations ('convert', 'move', 'change'), and includes useful prerequisite information. The only minor weakness is that it describes a single action, but given the narrow scope of the skill, this is appropriate.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the specific action ('Convert GitHub issues to discussions') and the tool ('agent-browser'), but only describes a single action rather than listing multiple concrete capabilities. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (convert GitHub issues to discussions using agent-browser) and 'when' (explicitly states 'Use when asked to convert, move, or change an issue to a discussion'). Also includes prerequisite information about agent-browser and login. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms: 'convert', 'move', 'change', 'issue', 'discussion', 'GitHub'. These cover the common variations a user would naturally say when requesting this task. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very specific niche: converting GitHub issues to discussions via agent-browser. This is unlikely to conflict with other skills due to the narrow, well-defined scope and distinct trigger terms. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, actionable skill that provides concrete browser automation commands for a task the gh CLI doesn't support. Its main weaknesses are the duplicated content between the workflow and quick reference sections, and the explicit dismissal of verification after an irreversible operation. The step-by-step structure with snapshot examples showing expected element output is a notable strength.
Suggestions
Add a verification step after conversion (e.g., check the URL redirected to /discussions/ or take a snapshot to confirm) instead of explicitly skipping verification for this irreversible operation.
Remove or significantly condense the Quick Reference section since it largely duplicates the workflow steps — or keep only the Quick Reference and remove the verbose step-by-step.
Add brief error handling guidance: what to do if 'Convert to discussion' button is not found (e.g., check permissions, check if issue is already converted).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient but has some redundancy — the detailed step-by-step workflow and the 'Quick Reference' section largely duplicate each other. The category guidelines and some explanatory text (e.g., 'The --headed flag shows the browser window so the user can log in') add minor bloat. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully concrete, copy-paste-ready bash commands for every step. The snapshot examples showing expected element output (with ref attributes) are particularly helpful for Claude to understand what to look for and act on. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced and the login check is a good validation point. However, step 8 explicitly says 'You don't need to verify, you are done now' — skipping verification after a destructive/irreversible operation (converting an issue to a discussion) is a gap. There's no error handling if the convert button isn't found or the dialog doesn't appear. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is reasonably structured with clear sections, but the Quick Reference section duplicates the workflow content inline rather than being separated. For a standalone skill with no bundle files, the organization is acceptable but the duplication hurts. The category guidelines could be more tightly integrated. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- freekmurze/dotfiles
- Commit
3974caa
- 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.