git-workflow
Git 版本控制与协作专家，涵盖 GitHub/Gitee 平台操作、Conventional Commits 规范及 PR/MR 最佳实践。
53
27%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.12xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./data/05-devops-gitworkflow/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%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 identifies the domain (Git version control) and mentions key areas like GitHub/Gitee, Conventional Commits, and PR/MR practices, but it reads more like a title than a functional description. It lacks specific concrete actions and entirely omits trigger guidance ('Use when...'), making it difficult for Claude to reliably select this skill from a large pool.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about git commands, writing commit messages, creating pull requests, resolving merge conflicts, or managing branches.'
List specific concrete actions instead of broad categories, e.g., 'Write Conventional Commit messages, create and review pull requests/merge requests, resolve merge conflicts, manage branches, configure .gitignore files.'
Include common natural language variations users might say, such as 'commit message', 'branch', 'merge conflict', 'pull request', 'code review', 'rebase', 'git log', 'cherry-pick'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Git version control) and mentions some areas like GitHub/Gitee platform operations, Conventional Commits, and PR/MR best practices, but doesn't list specific concrete actions (e.g., 'create branches', 'write commit messages', 'resolve merge conflicts'). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what the skill covers at a high level but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also only moderately detailed, warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'Git', 'GitHub', 'Gitee', 'Conventional Commits', 'PR/MR', but misses common natural user terms like 'commit message', 'branch', 'merge', 'pull request', 'code review', '.gitignore', 'rebase', etc. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Somewhat specific to Git workflows and collaboration platforms, but the broad framing ('版本控制与协作专家') could overlap with general coding or DevOps skills. The mention of specific platforms (GitHub/Gitee) and Conventional Commits adds some distinctiveness. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like a table of contents or high-level overview document than an actionable skill guide. It lacks executable commands, concrete workflows, and specific examples that would enable Claude to perform git operations effectively. The content describes concepts Claude already knows (what GitHub Actions is, what conventional commits are) without providing the project-specific, actionable guidance that would justify the token cost.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable git command sequences for common workflows (e.g., feature branch creation, PR submission, conflict resolution) with explicit validation steps.
Replace the generic Conventional Commits type list with project-specific examples showing input scenarios and expected commit message outputs, similar to the rubric's good example.
Add a step-by-step PR/MR workflow with validation checkpoints (e.g., run tests before pushing, verify CI passes before requesting review, squash commits before merge).
Remove descriptions of well-known concepts (what GitHub Pages is, what Gitee is) and replace with specific configuration snippets or templates that Claude can directly use.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary explanations (e.g., listing all conventional commit types that Claude already knows, explaining what GitHub Pages and Actions are at a surface level). It could be significantly tightened by removing well-known concepts and focusing only on project-specific conventions. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The content is almost entirely descriptive rather than instructive. There are no executable commands, no concrete code examples, no copy-paste ready workflows. The commit example is the only concrete element, but there are no actual git commands, no PR template examples, no CI/CD configuration snippets. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There are no sequenced multi-step processes. The branching strategy section lists branch names but doesn't describe the workflow steps (e.g., how to create a feature branch, how to merge, how to handle conflicts). The PR/MR process is mentioned but never defined with steps or validation checkpoints. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is one reference to AGENTS.md which is good, but the main content is a mix of shallow overviews that don't go deep enough to be useful on their own, nor do they point to detailed sub-documents for the various topics (commit conventions, branching strategies, platform guides). The MCP section could benefit from linking to detailed configuration files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.