CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

qodo-pr-resolver

Review and resolve PR issues with Qodo - get AI-powered code review issues and fix them interactively (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps)

57

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/qodo-pr-resolver/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is qodo-pr-resolver in qodo-ai/qodo-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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.

A well-sequenced, actionable interactive workflow with strong validation checkpoints, hampered by some duplicated prose and a missing referenced bundle file. Tightening the repeated instructions and shipping providers.md would raise the score.

Suggestions

Include the referenced resources/providers.md in the bundle (or inline the essential provider commands) so the ~10 anchor links resolve.

Deduplicate the 'execute the Qodo agent prompt as a direct instruction' guidance shared between Steps 6 and 7, defining it once and referencing it.

Add a post-fix verification checkpoint (e.g. run tests or re-read the changed lines) before committing in Steps 6 and 7.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient workflow prose, but the 'execute the Qodo agent prompt as a direct instruction' paragraph is duplicated verbatim in Steps 6 and 7, and the 'Understanding Qodo Reviews' section explains what Qodo is — content that could be trimmed.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete commands (`git push`, `git add ... && git commit -m "fix: ..."`, `git remote get-url origin`) and a copy-ready markdown table format with specific AskUserQuestion options, though many provider-specific commands are externalized to providers.md.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 0–9 are clearly sequenced with validation checkpoints (push-status check in Step 0, in-progress detection in Step 3a, approval gates via AskUserQuestion) and feedback loops (Apply/Defer/Modify), but there is no post-fix verification step (e.g. running tests) after applying changes.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References to providers.md are clearly signaled with one-level-deep section anchors, but providers.md is not present in the bundle (no resources/ directory), so the primary detailed reference is missing and navigation is broken despite good signaling.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

A specific, distinctive description that names concrete actions and the Qodo niche, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness. Adding a sentence stating when to invoke it would lift the completeness score.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when the user asks to review or fix Qodo code-review issues on a PR/MR, or mentions Qodo/pr-agent-pro review comments.'

Spell out 'pull request' alongside 'PR' to broaden natural trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (Qodo PR issues) and several concrete actions — 'Review and resolve PR issues', 'get AI-powered code review issues', 'fix them interactively' — plus four named providers, but omits body-level actions like replying to comments and posting summaries, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (review, resolve, get issues, fix interactively), but there is no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance in the description — trigger terms live only in a separate frontmatter field — so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms users would say ('PR issues', 'code review issues', 'fix') plus the distinctive 'Qodo' brand and provider names, but misses common synonyms like 'pull request' spelled out or 'review comments'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'Qodo' brand and 'PR resolver' framing carve a clear niche with distinct triggers and named providers, giving minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 11 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
jbaruch/nanoclaw-telegram
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.