Name: sentry
Rating: 57.599999999999994 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

Blog Docs Log in Get started

sentry

Sentry integration. Manage Organizations. Use when the user wants to interact with Sentry data.

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/sentry/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%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 tight, command-driven guide with a well-instrumented connection workflow including state polling and error recovery. Its main weaknesses are mild conceptual padding up front and no validation guidance for destructive actions like delete-issue.

Suggestions

Trim the opening Sentry definition and the 'auth plumbing' aside — Claude already knows what Sentry is.

Add a brief verification note for destructive actions (e.g. confirm issue ID and org scope before running delete-issue, or list-before-delete).

Show how to thread the actionId from 'action list' output into the 'action run' command to close the main execution gap.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient with dense executable commands, but the opening ('Sentry is an error tracking and performance monitoring platform...') and asides like 'so you can focus on the integration logic rather than auth plumbing' explain concepts Claude already knows — fitting the 'mostly efficient but some unnecessary explanation' anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready commands for install, login, connection ensure, action list/run, and proxy requests plus a full actions table; minor gaps remain (e.g. how to extract the actionId from the list response into the run command), placing it at 4 rather than fully-turnkey 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The connect flow is a clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and a feedback loop (poll BUILDING, handle CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED by re-polling, surface CONFIGURATION_ERROR); however destructive actions like 'Delete Issue' appear in the table with no verification guidance, a minor validation gap that keeps it at 4.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized single file with clear sections (Overview, Working with Sentry, Install, Auth, Connecting, Searching, Popular actions, Running, Proxy, Best practices) and no external references needed; the 20-row actions table is borderline bulk that could live in a reference file, so it sits at 4 rather than the cleanly-split 5.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 is concise and names Sentry explicitly with a clear Use-when trigger, but it under-specifies the breadth of Sentry actions and misses common user synonyms like 'errors' and 'issues'. It is distinct and unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.

Suggestions

Expand the action list in the description to concrete capabilities, e.g. 'list and triage issues, manage releases, projects, and teams'.

Add natural trigger terms users actually say — 'errors', 'issues', 'crash reports', 'releases' — alongside 'Sentry data'.

Sharpen the when clause to name the Sentry tasks covered (issues/releases/projects) rather than the generic 'interact with Sentry data'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('Sentry integration') and one concrete action ('Manage Organizations'), but offers no broader enumeration of capabilities (issues, releases, projects) — matching the 'domain + 1-2 actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than the multi-action 4 or generic 2.	3 / 5
Completeness	States what it does ('Sentry integration. Manage Organizations.') and gives an explicit when clause ('Use when the user wants to interact with Sentry data'); the when is present but could be more specific about which Sentry tasks, landing at 4 rather than the fully-explicit 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes the natural term 'Sentry' and 'Organizations' / 'Sentry data', but omits common synonyms users actually say ('errors', 'issues', 'releases', 'projects'), fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Sentry' names a specific platform with a distinct trigger ('interact with Sentry data'), giving it a clear niche with minimal overlap against other skills; this matches the 'clear niche, minimal conflict risk' anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: membranedev/application-skills
Path: skills/sentry/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 4 days 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.