fix-github-issue
Fix GitHub issues using gh CLI. Use when asked to fix, resolve, or address a GitHub issue. Creates fixes on separate branches, runs tests locally, and creates PRs when tests pass. Requires gh CLI authenticated and repo cloned locally.
85
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
100%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 strong skill description that clearly communicates what the skill does (fixes GitHub issues via a branch-test-PR workflow), when to use it (when asked to fix/resolve/address a GitHub issue), and its prerequisites. It uses natural trigger terms and describes a distinct, well-scoped workflow that is unlikely to conflict with other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: fix GitHub issues, create fixes on separate branches, run tests locally, create PRs when tests pass. Also mentions prerequisites (gh CLI authenticated, repo cloned locally). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (fixes GitHub issues by creating branches, running tests, creating PRs) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when asked to fix, resolve, or address a GitHub issue'). The trigger clause is explicit and well-defined. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'fix', 'resolve', 'address', 'GitHub issue', 'gh CLI', 'PR', 'tests'. These are terms users would naturally use when requesting this workflow. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clearly scoped to GitHub issue resolution workflow using gh CLI with a specific pipeline (branch → test → PR). Distinct from general coding skills, git skills, or generic GitHub interaction skills due to the specific end-to-end workflow described. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A solid workflow-oriented skill with clear sequencing and good validation checkpoints for testing and CI. Its main weaknesses are the branch naming inconsistency between steps, some unnecessary advice Claude already knows, and vagueness in the most critical step (actually implementing the fix). The PHP-specific test detection hint is oddly specific without being thorough.
Suggestions
Fix the branch naming inconsistency: step 2 uses `fix-<description>` while step 7 and quick reference use `fix/issue-<number>-<description>` — pick one convention and use it consistently throughout.
Remove generic advice Claude already knows ('Read the issue thoroughly', 'Make minimal, focused changes', 'Follow existing code style') to improve conciseness.
Either generalize the test detection beyond PHP (pest/phpunit/composer.json) or explicitly state this skill is PHP-focused; currently it's an awkward mix of generic and PHP-specific.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary guidance Claude already knows, like 'Read the issue thoroughly', 'Make minimal, focused changes', and 'Follow existing code style and patterns'. The 'Analyze the Codebase' section is vague filler. However, the overall structure is reasonably tight. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete bash commands for git/gh operations which is good, but the core task—actually implementing the fix (steps 3-4)—is entirely vague ('Locate files related to the issue', 'Make minimal, focused changes'). The test detection guidance is PHP-specific but still somewhat vague ('Most likely it will be pest or phpunit'). There's also an inconsistency in branch naming between step 2 (`fix-<description>`) and step 7/quick reference (`fix/issue-<number>-<description>`). | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 8-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints: tests must pass before proceeding (step 5), CI monitoring with fix-and-retry loop (step 8), and a feedback loop for test failures. The workflow covers the full lifecycle from issue reading to CI passing. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a single file with reasonable structure and a useful quick reference section at the end. However, the content is somewhat long for what it conveys, and there's no reference to external files for things like language-specific test detection patterns or commit message conventions that could benefit from separate documentation. | 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
2c6f6e8
- 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.