coderabbit-core-workflow-a
Execute CodeRabbit primary workflow: Core Workflow A. Use when implementing primary use case, building main features, or core integration tasks. Trigger with phrases like "coderabbit main workflow", "primary task with coderabbit".
Overall
score
38%
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills --skill coderabbit-core-workflow-aActivation
0%This description fails on all dimensions by using circular, self-referential language that provides no actual information about what the skill does. It reads like a placeholder template rather than a functional description. The trigger terms are artificial phrases no user would naturally use, and there are no concrete actions or capabilities specified.
Suggestions
Replace abstract terms like 'Core Workflow A' and 'primary use case' with specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Runs automated code reviews on pull requests, generates inline comments, and summarizes changes').
Add natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'code review', 'PR review', 'review my changes', 'analyze pull request', or specific file types/languages supported.
Specify the actual use cases with explicit triggers like 'Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code changes, or when the user mentions code review, PR feedback, or wants automated review comments.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague, abstract language like 'primary workflow', 'primary use case', 'main features', and 'core integration tasks' without specifying any concrete actions. No actual capabilities are described. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | While it attempts to answer 'when' with trigger phrases, the 'what' is completely missing - 'Core Workflow A' and 'primary use case' tell us nothing about actual functionality. Both components are very weak. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger phrases 'coderabbit main workflow' and 'primary task with coderabbit' are artificial constructs users would never naturally say. No natural keywords describing what the skill actually does are present. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Terms like 'primary workflow', 'main features', and 'core integration' are extremely generic and could apply to virtually any skill. Nothing distinguishes this from other CodeRabbit skills or general development tools. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%This skill is a well-structured template but lacks any actual executable content. All code blocks contain placeholder comments instead of real implementations, making it completely non-actionable. The organization and progressive disclosure are good, but the skill provides no concrete guidance for performing the 'Core Workflow A' it claims to teach.
Suggestions
Replace all placeholder code comments ('// Step 1 implementation') with actual executable TypeScript code showing real CodeRabbit API calls
Fill in the error handling table with real errors, causes, and solutions specific to CodeRabbit operations
Add validation checkpoints between steps (e.g., 'Verify initialization succeeded before proceeding to Step 2')
Remove or condense the prerequisites section - Claude doesn't need to be told to have 'understanding of core concepts'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The structure is reasonable but contains placeholder content ('// Step 1 implementation') that adds no value. The prerequisites section explains things Claude likely knows, and the error handling table uses generic placeholders. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The code blocks are entirely placeholder comments with no executable code. There are no concrete commands, actual API calls, or real examples - just structural templates that describe rather than instruct. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are numbered and sequenced, but there are no validation checkpoints between steps, no feedback loops for error recovery, and the error handling table contains only placeholder content without real guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with clear sections, appropriate use of external references (documentation links, next steps pointing to related workflow), and content is organized logically without deep nesting. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
75%Validation — 12 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Passed | |
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.