CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

understand-issue

Collaboratively investigate a GitHub issue or bug — trace history, understand architecture, diagnose root cause

60

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.mastracode/skills/understand-issue/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable with concrete commands, explicit validation gates, and a well-sequenced multi-phase workflow. Its weaknesses are length and repetition that could be tightened, and a monolithic structure that could offload some detail into reference files.

Suggestions

Tighten repeated guidance: state 'form your own opinion but ask the user first' once and reference it, rather than restating it in Phases 4, 5, 6, and the Behavior Rules.

Move reusable lettered-option templates and the People-profiling command patterns into a references/ file, keeping SKILL.md as an overview with one-level-deep links.

Trim the verbose example dialogue blocks to a minimal schema, since the phrasing is largely templated across phases.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and explicitly discourages fluff, and it assumes Claude knows git/gh basics, but at ~240 lines it repeats principles (e.g. 'form your own opinion first') across phases and includes verbose lettered-option templates that could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready `gh` commands with exact `--json`/`--jq` flags, concrete git commands, specific file paths, and ready-to-use prompt templates, fully matching the executable-guidance anchor.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

An explicit 8-phase sequence with pacing rules, validation gates ('Issue quality gate', 'Understanding Quality Gate'), and a feedback loop in Phase 5 that repeats until the cause is agreed.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Well organized into clear phases, but it is a single monolithic ~240-line file with no bundle references; content like the People-profiling detail and reusable prompt templates is inline that could be split out.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

67%

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 is specific and occupies a clear niche, with strong concrete verbs and third-person voice. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and limited keyword variation, which leave the 'when to use' guidance only implied.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when investigating a GitHub issue, triaging a bug report, or diagnosing the root cause of unexpected behavior.'

Broaden trigger terms to include natural variations users say: 'triage', 'debug a report', 'figure out why X is happening', 'investigate a regression'.

Clarify the collaborative/diagnostic framing so it does not read as generic debugging that could overlap with code-fixing skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — 'trace history, understand architecture, diagnose root cause' — matching the anchor for listing several specific concrete actions rather than a single vague domain.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly states what the skill does but provides no 'Use when...' trigger clause, so the 'when' is only implied and completeness is capped at 2 per the guidelines.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms users would say ('GitHub issue', 'bug') but lacks common variations like 'triage', 'debug', 'report', or 'investigate a bug report', so coverage is partial.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'GitHub issue' framing plus 'trace history' and 'diagnose root cause' carve a distinct issue-investigation niche that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
mastra-ai/mastra
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.