CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cursor-agents-workflow

Human handoff, Linear branch names, reviewable (non-draft) PRs, the `cursor` GitHub label, Claude, Greptile, and Codex review comments, preview test steps, proof of work posted on the GitHub PR, and review-doubt notes for Cursor agents. Use when a Cursor Cloud or Cursor desktop agent implements a Linear issue, opens a GitHub PR, asks a human to test, posts screenshots or videos, or handles Claude, Greptile, or Codex code-review comments.

76

Quality

95%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

90%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 tight, high-signal workflow doc that assumes competence and leads with executable guidance — branch formats, message templates, HTML proof snippets, and Correct/Wrong pairs. It scores slightly below the top on workflow_clarity and progressive_disclosure because a few sequences lack explicit validation checkpoints and the single-file doc is longer than the simple-skill exception allows.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and efficient throughout: it assumes Claude's competence, never explains what Linear/Cursor/PRs/bot reviewers are, and every section delivers operational guidance with concrete templates and Correct/Wrong pairs — every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Fully actionable instruction skill: exact branch-name format `lfe-{id}-{kebab-title}`, copy-paste HTML snippets with absolute paths, a full TL;DR/Test/Data/Sandbox message template, and explicit Correct/Wrong examples — guidance is specific enough to execute directly.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Multi-step processes are clearly sequenced with feedback loops where it matters most — the bot-review flow keeps threads open, applies fixes then resolves, or surfaces skips to a human with an invitation to doubt — but a few sequences (e.g. open PR → apply `cursor` label) are guidance rather than validation-checkpointed steps, leaving minor gaps versus the anchor-5 'explicit validation steps and checklists' bar.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized single-level structure with clear section headers (Branch names, Linear connection, Pull requests, Bot review comments, Human testing, Proof of work, What to doubt, Human asks) and one clearly-signaled sibling reference (`../linear-agent-writes/SKILL.md`); no bundle files exist, so all content is appropriately inline, but at ~167 lines it exceeds the simple-skill (<50 lines) threshold that would allow a 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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 a strong, niche-scoped activation spec: it enumerates concrete deliverables and pairs them with an explicit, natural-language 'Use when...' trigger clause covering the real activation scenarios. It uses declarative third-person voice and includes specific tool names that minimize conflict risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete deliverables — 'Linear branch names, reviewable (non-draft) PRs, the `cursor` GitHub label, Claude, Greptile, and Codex review comments, preview test steps, proof of work posted on the GitHub PR, and review-doubt notes' — giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill produces.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (the deliverable list) and 'when' via a concrete 'Use when a Cursor Cloud or Cursor desktop agent implements...' clause with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 example.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases a user/agent would say are comprehensive — 'implements a Linear issue, opens a GitHub PR, asks a human to test, posts screenshots or videos, or handles Claude, Greptile, or Codex code-review comments' — including the specific tool names and synonyms.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear, narrow niche — Cursor agents implementing Linear issues and opening GitHub PRs with specific named bot reviewers — with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

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.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
langfuse/langfuse
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.