CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

api-changes

Use when customer-facing API changes were made — i.e., API report .md files differ from main. Guides through release tag assignment, API Council review requirements, breaking change classification, deprecation process, and changeset guidance. Triggered automatically by ci-readiness-check when api-report diffs are detected.

68

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

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.

A highly actionable, well-sequenced review workflow with concrete commands, tables, and checklists. It is slightly verbose in places and monolithic, with no progressive disclosure of its longer process detail into reference files.

Suggestions

Tighten the Step 2 export-reachability paragraph and collapse the repeated "Tell the user" / "Share these links with the user" scaffolding into a shared convention.

Consider moving the lengthy breaking-change (Step 4) and deprecation (Step 5) processes into a reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview that links one level deep.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly dense and actionable with little concept-explanation fluff, but passages like the Step 2 export-reachability paragraph and the repeated "Tell the user" / "Share these links with the user" framing could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable commands (e.g. `git diff $(git merge-base HEAD origin/main)...HEAD`, `pnpm flub changeset add --empty`), concrete decision tables, exact branch/version rules, and a copy-paste TSDoc deprecation template.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Seven clearly sequenced steps with explicit stop conditions ("If all changes are @internal-only... stop"), a deprecation checklist, a user-confirmation gate before finalizing the changeset, and a final go/no-go summary.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Well organized into labeled sections, but it is a single monolithic file over 50 lines with no external references; detailed reference-worthy material (breaking-change process, deprecation checklist) lives inline rather than being split out.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description with explicit what/when structure and a well-scoped, distinctive niche. Its only weakness is that the lead trigger relies on internal tooling jargon rather than the most natural user phrasings.

Suggestions

Lead the trigger with natural phrasings like "Use when making customer-facing API changes (additions, removals, breaking changes, deprecations)" before the api-report-diff detail.

Move the auto-trigger mechanism ("Triggered automatically by ci-readiness-check...") to a secondary clause so the primary trigger reads as something a user would actually say.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions — "release tag assignment, API Council review requirements, breaking change classification, deprecation process, and changeset guidance" — matching the anchor for enumerating several concrete capabilities.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ("Guides through release tag assignment, API Council review requirements, breaking change classification, deprecation process, and changeset guidance") and when ("Use when customer-facing API changes were made") with an explicit trigger clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It names relevant natural domain terms (API changes, breaking change, deprecation, changeset, API Council), but the explicit trigger leans on internal jargon ("API report .md files differ from main", "ci-readiness-check", "api-report diffs") rather than phrasings a user would naturally say.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear, narrow niche (Fluid Framework customer-facing API review) with distinct triggers, making it unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
microsoft/FluidFramework
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.