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。

1.12x

Quality

52%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

98%

1.12x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/data/05-devops-gitworkflow/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

43%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 well-organized reference catalog of Git workflow modules, but it re-explains well-known Conventional Commit types, lacks executable commands beyond the commit example, presents no sequenced workflow with validation, and references a missing AGENTS.md file.

Suggestions

Trim the standard Conventional Commit type definitions (Claude already knows them) and keep only the project-specific convention and a couple of examples.

Add a concrete sequenced workflow (e.g. stage → write Conventional Commit → push → open PR/MR) with a validation checkpoint such as confirming the message format or running a pre-commit check.

Provide executable commands for the platform/CI sections (e.g. example GitHub Actions workflow, Gitee Go pipeline) instead of one-line feature descriptions, and either create the referenced AGENTS.md or remove the dangling link.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body re-lists standard Conventional Commit types (feat, fix, docs, style, refactor, perf, test, chore) with definitions that Claude already knows, which is unnecessary explanation, though the rest is compact and well-organized, placing it just above the verbose anchors but not fully efficient.	3 / 5
Actionability	The commit format `<type>(<scope>): <description>` and example `feat(auth): add google oauth2 login support` are concrete, but the branching, platform, and MCP sections are descriptive ("CI/CD 首选", "静态网站托管") with no executable commands or steps, leaving key details missing.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The content is a topical catalog rather than a sequenced process; there is no commit/push/review workflow with ordered steps, and no validation checkpoints for the potentially destructive git operations, fitting the rough-or-absent-sequence anchor rather than the listed-steps anchor.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are clearly organized, but the body references [AGENTS.md](AGENTS.md) which is not present in any bundle directory (a dangling reference), and MCP/agent details are inlined that could live in separate files, so structure is present but references are not cleanly signaled or backed by real files.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Description

61%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 clearly identifies the Git/platform-collaboration niche with good natural trigger terms, but it lists coverage topics rather than concrete actions and omits any explicit "Use when..." guidance, capping completeness.

Suggestions

Add a concrete "Use when..." trigger clause naming the situations that should activate this skill (e.g. writing commit messages, opening PRs/MRs, choosing a branch strategy).

Replace topic nouns with concrete verbs/actions (e.g. "generate Conventional Commit messages, open and review PRs/MRs, set up branch strategies") to lift specificity.

Include common natural phrasings like "commit message" and "code review" as explicit trigger terms.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (Git, GitHub/Gitee) and a few concrete coverage areas like "Conventional Commits 规范" and "PR/MR 最佳实践", but describes coverage topics rather than concrete executable actions, so it sits at the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions rather than the comprehensive list at 5.	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is reasonably clear (Git version control and collaboration on GitHub/Gitee), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms a user would say are present — "Git", "版本控制", "GitHub", "Gitee", "PR/MR", "Conventional Commits" — giving good keyword coverage, though common variations like "commit message" or "code review" as explicit triggers are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Git 版本控制与协作专家" with GitHub/Gitee/Conventional Commits/PR-MR is a fairly distinct niche, but the broad Git framing leaves minor overlap risk with general git or platform-specific skills rather than the minimal conflict risk of a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
Path: skills/data/05-devops-gitworkflow/SKILL.md
Commit: 04324c6

Reviewed: about 20 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.