related-repositories
List related repositories and their key paths
66
53%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
82%
1.51xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/related-repositories/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
14%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 description is too vague and incomplete to effectively guide skill selection. It lacks specific actions, explicit trigger conditions, and distinctive language that would differentiate it from other repository or file-related skills. The meaning of 'related repositories' and 'key paths' is unclear without additional context.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause specifying trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about related projects, monorepo structure, or wants to discover sibling repositories.'
Define what 'related repositories' means concretely—e.g., dependencies, monorepo packages, organization repos—and specify what 'key paths' refers to (entry points, config files, source directories).
Include natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'repos', 'project structure', 'dependencies', 'workspace layout', or 'monorepo'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names a single vague action ('list related repositories and their key paths') without specifying what 'related' means, how repositories are discovered, or what 'key paths' refers to. It lacks concrete, specific actions. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description only weakly addresses 'what' (list repositories and paths) and completely lacks any 'when' guidance or explicit trigger clause. There is no 'Use when...' or equivalent. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | It includes 'repositories' and 'paths' which are somewhat relevant keywords, but misses common variations like 'repos', 'codebases', 'project structure', 'directory layout', or specific contexts that would help match user queries. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is very generic and could easily conflict with any skill related to repository management, project navigation, file browsing, or directory listing. 'Related repositories' is ambiguous and not distinctive. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-crafted reference skill that serves as a clean registry of related repositories. It's concise, actionable with concrete URLs and paths, and well-structured with consistent formatting per entry. The only minor weakness is that as a flat list it could benefit from categorization or links to deeper documentation for individual repositories.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and purely informational — a registry of repositories with only the essential fields (URLs, paths, descriptions, key paths). No unnecessary explanations or padding. Every token serves a purpose. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Each repository entry provides concrete, copy-paste ready git URLs, local paths, and project URLs. The opening instruction to clone missing repos with `git clone <git_url> <local_path>` is directly actionable. Key paths are specific directory references. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a simple reference/registry skill with a single clear action (clone if not present). The one workflow step is unambiguous, and the note about preferring knowledge-graph repo over handbook for GKG design documents provides clear decision guidance. No multi-step or destructive operations require validation checkpoints. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-organized with clear sections per repository, but it's a flat list that could grow unwieldy. There are no references to supporting files, though for a registry of this size that's borderline acceptable. The inline note about GKG design documents is appropriately placed but the skill could benefit from grouping repos by category or linking to more detailed per-repo guides if they exist. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- gitlabhq/orbit-knowledge-graph
- Commit
f5efc36
- 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.