CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

create-user-story

Create user stories with duplicate checking across any project tracker (Linear, GitHub Issues, Jira)

60

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/create-user-story/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 body is a well-sequenced, actionable workflow with clear validation gates and concrete per-tracker commands. Main gaps are unresolved customization placeholders and a monolithic single-file structure that could benefit from splitting reusable blocks into reference files.

Suggestions

Resolve the [CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo] and YOUR-PROJECT-KEY placeholders by reading them from MY-INTEGRATIONS.md / MY-PROFILE.md at runtime instead of leaving literal placeholders.

Extract the reusable user-story template and the per-tracker command blocks into reference files (e.g. references/story-template.md, references/tracker-commands.md) and link to them, reducing SKILL.md length.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry loop for tracker creation failures (e.g. on API error, retry once then fall back to local save) to strengthen the workflow's feedback structure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean and actionable with concrete commands and templates, but has minor padding: the ToolSearch instruction repeats across Linear sections and the Fallback Behavior table partially restates Phase 5 content. It is not a 5 because a few sections could be tightened, and not a 3 because it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, mostly copy-paste-ready guidance (gh search/create commands, named MCP tools, JQL) across all three trackers plus a vault fallback. It is not a 5 because of unresolved [CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo] / YOUR-PROJECT-KEY placeholders and the Linear/Jira paths relying on WebFetch rather than fully executable commands.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Phases 1–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation/confirmation gates (duplicate check before create, user review before creation, confirm-and-link after). It is not a 5 because, while error handling covers retries, there is no tight validate→fix→re-run feedback loop for the batch creation step. The batch-operation cap does not apply because validation checkpoints are present.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well organized into clearly labeled sections (When to Invoke, Pre-Flight, Execution Strategy phases, Fallback, Error Handling). It is not a 5 because everything is inlined in one ~230-line file with no one-level-deep references for content that could be split (story template, per-tracker command blocks).

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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.

The description is specific and distinct, naming concrete actions and three real trackers, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance, which caps completeness. Adding a trigger clause would lift the strongest remaining gap.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to create a user story, feature request, or issue, or says create story / new ticket.'

Add common synonyms like 'ticket', 'feature request', and 'backlog item' to broaden natural trigger coverage.

Optionally mention the vault fallback (save as markdown when no tracker is active) to round out the capability description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete actions ('Create user stories', 'duplicate checking') and enumerates three specific trackers (Linear, GitHub Issues, Jira), giving several specific actions with only minor coverage gaps. It is not a 5 because the action set is limited to create + duplicate-check rather than a comprehensive list of operations.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (create user stories with duplicate checking across trackers), but there is no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the rubric completeness is capped at 3. It is not a 4 because the 'when' is entirely absent rather than merely implicit.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ('create user stories', 'duplicate checking') plus concrete platform names, but omits common synonyms such as 'ticket', 'feature request', or 'backlog item'. It is not a 5 because a few natural variations are missing, and not a 3 because keyword coverage is genuinely good.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The combination of user-story creation, duplicate checking, and three named trackers carves a mostly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against a generic issue-creation skill. It is not a 5 because a plain 'create issue/ticket' skill could still overlap on the creation half.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
huytieu/COG-second-brain
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.