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.
85
66%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.05xAverage score across 6 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./analysis-methods/diff-analysis-majiayu000-claude-skill-registr/SKILL.mdQuality
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, particularly due to the explicit 'DO NOT use when' clauses that help disambiguate from related skills. The trigger terms are comprehensive and natural. The main weakness is that the capability descriptions could be more concrete—specifying exact outputs or operations rather than abstract methodological terms like 'methodology for categorizing changes'.
Suggestions
Replace the abstract opening ('Methodology for categorizing changes...') with more concrete action verbs and outputs, e.g., 'Parses diffs to categorize changes by type, assigns risk scores, and generates structured change summaries for release notes.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (changeset analysis) and several actions (categorizing changes, assessing risks, creating summaries), but the actions remain somewhat abstract rather than listing concrete operations like 'parse git diffs, assign risk scores, generate release notes from commit history'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (categorizing changes, assessing risks, creating summaries from changesets) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause with triggers, plus helpful 'DO NOT use when' clauses that distinguish it from related skills like catchup and review-core). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes a strong set of natural trigger terms that users would actually say: 'diff analysis', 'changeset review', 'risk assessment', 'change categorization', 'release preparation', 'change summary', 'git diff'. These cover common variations well. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The explicit 'DO NOT use when' clauses differentiating it from 'catchup' and 'review-core with pensive skills' significantly reduce conflict risk. The focus on systematic change analysis with risk scoring carves out a clear niche distinct from general code review or context catchup. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill has good structural organization and progressive disclosure with clear module references, but critically lacks actionable content. The 4-step methodology reads as an abstract framework rather than executable guidance—every step delegates its substance to external modules, leaving the main skill file as a table of contents with no concrete examples, commands, or sample outputs. Without seeing the referenced modules, Claude would not know how to actually perform diff analysis.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example for at least one step—e.g., show a sample git diff input and the expected categorized output format for Step 2.
Include specific commands or tool invocations (e.g., `git diff --stat`, `git log --oneline`) in Step 1 rather than just saying 'define comparison scope'.
Provide a concrete risk scoring example in Step 3 (e.g., a table showing change type → risk level mapping) so the skill is usable even without loading the external module.
Add a sample summary output format for Step 4 showing exactly what the deliverable should look like (e.g., a markdown template with filled-in fields).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary sections like 'Activation Patterns' and 'When to Use' that largely duplicate the frontmatter description. The trigger keywords and auto-load conditions add little value for Claude. However, the core methodology is reasonably lean. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill is almost entirely abstract direction with no concrete code, commands, or examples. Steps like 'Define comparison scope' and 'Group changes by semantic type' describe rather than instruct. There are no executable examples, no sample outputs, no concrete diff analysis demonstrations, and the actual methodology is deferred to external modules. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 4-step methodology provides a clear sequence with named stages and TodoWrite checkpoints, which is good. However, the actual content of each step is vague ('Evaluate impact', 'Group changes by semantic type') and delegates all substance to external modules, making the workflow a skeleton without actionable detail. No validation or feedback loops are present for error recovery. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear one-level-deep references to specific modules (semantic-categorization.md, risk-assessment-framework.md, git-diff-patterns.md). The conditional loading section clearly signals when each module should be loaded, and integration points are explicitly listed. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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 | |
- Repository
- majiayu000/claude-skill-registry-data
- Commit
6770aaa
- 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.