diff-analysis
Methodology for categorizing changes, assessing risks, and creating summaries from any changeset. Triggers: diff analysis, changeset review, risk assessment, change categorization, semantic analysis, release preparation, change summary, git diff Use when: analyzing specific changesets, assessing risk of changes, preparing release notes, categorizing changes by type and impact DO NOT use when: quick context catchup - use catchup instead. DO NOT use when: full PR review - use review-core with pensive skills. Use this skill for systematic change analysis with risk scoring.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:majiayu000/claude-skill-registry-data --skill diff-analysis93
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 98%
↑ 1.05xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
89%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-structured skill description with strong completeness and distinctiveness. The explicit 'Use when' and 'DO NOT use when' clauses effectively guide skill selection. The main weakness is that the capability descriptions are somewhat abstract (e.g., 'assessing risks') rather than listing concrete operations.
Suggestions
Make capabilities more concrete by specifying outputs, e.g., 'generates risk scores, categorizes changes by type (breaking/non-breaking), produces structured summaries with impact analysis'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (changeset analysis) and lists some actions (categorizing changes, assessing risks, creating summaries), but the actions are somewhat abstract rather than concrete operations like 'extract text' or 'fill forms'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (categorizing changes, assessing risks, creating summaries) and when (explicit 'Use when' clause with triggers, plus helpful 'DO NOT use when' clauses to distinguish from similar skills). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good coverage of natural terms users would say: 'diff analysis', 'changeset review', 'risk assessment', 'release preparation', 'change summary', 'git diff'. These are terms users would naturally use when needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Explicitly distinguishes itself from related skills ('catchup' and 'review-core with pensive skills') with clear DO NOT use clauses, and carves out a specific niche for 'systematic change analysis with risk scoring'. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured methodology skill with excellent workflow clarity and progressive disclosure. The 4-step process with TodoWrite checkpoints provides clear sequencing. The main weakness is the lack of concrete examples showing what categorized changes or risk assessments actually look like in practice, which would improve actionability.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example showing sample output for each step (e.g., what a categorized change list looks like, what a risk assessment output contains)
Include a brief example of the summary format mentioned in Step 4 to make the expected output more tangible
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, avoiding unnecessary explanations. Every section serves a clear purpose with no padding or concepts Claude would already know. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The methodology provides clear steps and references to modules, but lacks concrete examples of actual diff analysis output, specific commands, or executable code snippets that would make it copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 4-step methodology is clearly sequenced with explicit TodoWrite checkpoints for each step. The progressive loading section provides clear conditional logic, and exit criteria define completion state. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with clear overview, conditional module loading, and well-signaled one-level-deep references to specific modules. Content is appropriately split between the main skill and referenced modules. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 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.