frb-issue-to-green-pr

Use when implementing a GitHub issue, bug fix, or feature in flutter_rust_bridge end-to-end: develop the change, add regression coverage, prepare and open a PR, monitor CI until green, request and resolve Gemini review, and keep following up on a 5 minute cadence until the PR is ready.

Quality

88%

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

85%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-sequenced orchestration skill with concrete actionable specifics, strong validation checkpoints and feedback loops, and clean one-level-deep delegation to subskills. Its lone weakness is mild redundancy across phases that lightly hurts token efficiency.

Suggestions

Consolidate the frb_example/dart_minimal Final Placement Gate so it is stated once (e.g. in step 4) and merely re-referenced from step 5, removing the duplicated explanation.

Tighten verbose bullets such as the reproduction-PR naming paragraph into a compact rule with the two title templates, preserving the same instructions in fewer tokens.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body assumes Claude's competence (it never explains what a PR, CI, or Gemini review is) and delegates detail to subskills, but the Final Placement Gate constraint on frb_example/dart_minimal is restated in both step 4 and step 5, and several bullets could be tightened — matching the "mostly efficient but could be tightened" anchor rather than the leanest one.	2 / 3
Actionability	Despite being an instruction-only orchestrator, it gives concrete, copy-ready specifics: exact PR titles ("Reproduce ISSUE_SUMMARY with intentional red CI"), the exact comment "/gemini review", the closing keyword "Close #1234", and exact paths (tools/manual_tests/NAME.md, frb_example/pure_dart), so the absence of code is not a penalty.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 8-step sequence has explicit validation gates ("Do not proceed to the fix PR until the reproduction PR exists and has either a matching red CI run or a precise manual test report"), a Final Placement Gate, CI feedback loops (diagnose -> fix -> commit -> push -> continue monitoring), and explicit stop conditions in step 8 — a clear sequence with checkpoints and error-recovery loops.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is an overview that points to one-level-deep subskills clearly signaled by phase ("Read these when entering the matching phase"), with a dedicated Required Subskills section and no nested/deep file chains; no bundle files exist to verify, but the in-file structure is well-organized and appropriately split.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

92%

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, explicit, action-dense description that clearly states when and what, with natural trigger terms. Its only weakness is conflict risk against the narrower sibling FRB skills it orchestrates.

Suggestions

Add a scoping phrase that distinguishes this top-level orchestrator from sibling phase skills, e.g. "Use as the top-level orchestrator (not a single-phase skill) when the user wants the full end-to-end issue-to-green-PR flow in flutter_rust_bridge."

Consider naming the sibling skills it is meant to supersede (e.g. "instead of frb-develop-feature alone") so the model picks this skill for end-to-end requests rather than a phase skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists multiple concrete actions — "develop the change, add regression coverage, prepare and open a PR, monitor CI until green, request and resolve Gemini review, and keep following up on a 5 minute cadence" — matching the anchor for listing several specific concrete actions rather than vague language.	3 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both halves: the "when" via "Use when implementing a GitHub issue, bug fix, or feature in flutter_rust_bridge end-to-end" and the "what" via the enumerated end-to-end actions, satisfying the top anchor for explicit what-and-when triggers.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural trigger terms a developer would actually say are well covered: "implementing a GitHub issue, bug fix, or feature", "end-to-end", "PR", "CI", and "Gemini review", with no reliance on opaque jargon.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The "end-to-end ... PR, CI, Gemini" framing carves a distinct orchestrator niche, but the skill coexists with many sibling FRB phase skills (e.g. frb-develop-feature) that would also trigger on "fix a bug in flutter_rust_bridge", so overlap with similar skills remains.	2 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 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: fzyzcjy/flutter_rust_bridge
Path: .claude/skills/frb-issue-to-green-pr/SKILL.md
Commit: 1d5348b

Reviewed: 5 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.