coderabbit-core-workflow-b
Tune CodeRabbit review configuration: learnings, code guidelines, and noise reduction. Use when fine-tuning review quality, training CodeRabbit with team preferences, adding code guidelines, or reducing false positives. Trigger with phrases like "coderabbit tune reviews", "coderabbit learnings", "coderabbit guidelines", "reduce coderabbit noise", "coderabbit false positives".
84
82%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 is a well-crafted skill description that clearly identifies its niche (CodeRabbit review configuration tuning), lists specific capabilities, and provides explicit trigger guidance with natural user phrases. It follows best practices by using third person voice, including a 'Use when' clause, and providing concrete trigger phrases that minimize ambiguity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: tuning configuration, managing learnings, adding code guidelines, and noise reduction. These are distinct, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (tune CodeRabbit review configuration: learnings, code guidelines, noise reduction) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause plus 'Trigger with phrases like' section with specific examples). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms including 'coderabbit tune reviews', 'coderabbit learnings', 'coderabbit guidelines', 'reduce coderabbit noise', 'coderabbit false positives'. These are phrases users would naturally say. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific 'CodeRabbit' product name and the focus on review tuning/configuration. The trigger terms are all prefixed with 'coderabbit', making conflicts with other skills very unlikely. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, actionable skill with concrete YAML configurations and real examples for tuning CodeRabbit reviews. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (some sections could be tighter) and the lack of explicit validation checkpoints after configuration changes — there's no 'verify your changes took effect' step between configuring and monitoring. The progressive disclosure could be improved by extracting detailed config blocks into reference files.
Suggestions
Add explicit validation steps after Steps 1-4, e.g., 'Open a test PR and verify CodeRabbit respects the new path_filters' or 'Check the dashboard to confirm learnings were recorded'.
Trim the Overview and Prerequisites sections — Claude doesn't need to be told what CodeRabbit learnings are conceptually; jump straight to configuration.
Consider extracting the detailed YAML configuration examples (especially the path_filters and path_instructions blocks) into a separate reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with minimal inline examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary context (e.g., the overview explaining what CodeRabbit does, the prerequisites section, the 'Output' section restating what was done). The YAML comments listing auto-detected files are useful but slightly verbose. Overall mostly efficient but could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, copy-paste ready YAML configurations, specific PR comment examples for training learnings, executable bash scripts for monitoring, and precise file paths and config keys. Every step has actionable code or configuration. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced and logically ordered from configuration through monitoring. However, there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops — after configuring guidelines or changing profiles, there's no explicit 'verify it works' step. The A/B testing step is entirely comments/pseudoprocess rather than actionable validation. The monitoring script in Step 6 partially addresses this but lacks a feedback loop for corrective action. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References to external resources and related skills (workflow A, common errors) are present and one-level deep. However, the inline content is quite long with detailed YAML blocks that could be split into separate reference files. The error handling table and resources section are well-structured but the main body could benefit from being an overview with links to detailed configuration guides. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
c8a915c
- 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.