CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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

1.12x
Quality

27%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

98%

1.12x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/data/05-devops-gitworkflow/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

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 overview document than an actionable skill. It lists topics (commit conventions, branching strategies, platform features, MCP tools) at a surface level without providing the concrete, executable guidance Claude needs to actually perform tasks. The content describes what things are rather than instructing how to do them.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable command sequences for common workflows (e.g., creating a feature branch, making a conventional commit, opening a PR via CLI or MCP tool) with copy-paste ready examples.

Replace the descriptive platform feature lists with actionable step-by-step workflows, such as a complete PR creation flow with validation steps (e.g., lint commit messages, run CI checks, verify branch is up to date).

Add a concrete MCP tool usage example showing the actual tool calls and parameters rather than just listing capabilities (e.g., show the exact sequence for using GitHub MCP to create a PR with a conventional commit message).

Remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows (like what each commit type means) and replace with decision guidance or edge cases that add genuine value.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill includes some unnecessary explanatory content (e.g., explaining what Conventional Commits types mean, which Claude already knows) and lists platform features at a surface level without adding actionable value. However, it's not excessively verbose.

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 message example is the only concrete element, and even the MCP tool section just lists capabilities without showing how to use them.

1 / 3

Workflow Clarity

There are no sequenced multi-step workflows. The branching strategies are listed as bullet points without clear step-by-step processes. The PR/Code Review flow is mentioned but never defined. No validation checkpoints or feedback loops exist for any operation.

1 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

There is a reference to AGENTS.md and external links, showing some attempt at progressive disclosure. However, no bundle files exist to support the reference, and the content that is present is shallow enough that it doesn't warrant splitting—yet also not deep enough to be self-contained. The structure with headers is reasonable but the content within each section is too thin.

2 / 3

Total

6

/

12

Passed

Description

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 and some key topics (Git, GitHub/Gitee, Conventional Commits, PR/MR) but remains at a high level without listing concrete actions. It critically lacks a 'Use when...' clause, making it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill over others. Adding explicit triggers and specific capabilities would significantly improve its effectiveness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about git commands, commit messages, branching strategies, pull requests, merge requests, or code review workflows.'

List specific concrete actions such as 'write commit messages following Conventional Commits, create and manage branches, resolve merge conflicts, set up PR/MR workflows, configure .gitignore files.'

Include more natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'commit message', 'branch', 'merge conflict', 'pull request', 'code review', 'git log', 'rebase'.

DimensionReasoningScore

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 user-facing variations such as 'commit message', 'branch', 'merge', 'pull request', 'code review', 'git diff', '.gitignore'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Mentioning specific platforms (GitHub/Gitee) and standards (Conventional Commits) provides some distinctiveness, but the broad framing as a 'Git version control and collaboration expert' could overlap with general coding or DevOps skills.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
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.