CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

fast-pull-request

Generate a pull request description for the FAST repository using the provided template.

Quality

67%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/fast-pull-request/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 focused, actionable instruction set for a single non-destructive task, with repo-specific checkbox semantics that Claude could not infer on its own. Its main weaknesses are redundant scope statements and the absence of any section headers or an example output to anchor the expected format.

Suggestions

Merge the duplicated scope statements (lines 5-8 and 10-15) into a single paragraph stating the task and the template path once.

Add brief section headers (e.g. '## Scope', '## Section guidance', '## Output') to organize the paragraphs.

Include a short example of the expected markdown output shape to make the deliverable unambiguous.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient instruction-only prose, but the scope is stated twice ('This skill only applies to...' then 'Do not create or modify... This skill is only for generating the markdown content...') and the template instruction is repeated in lines 10-15, so it could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance: exact checkbox labels quoted, explicit conditional rules ('If none are found, remove the Issues section', 'It should never be checked'), and a defined output format. Minor gaps remain — 'The checklist section should be completed to indicate the status' is vague and no example output is shown.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A linear, unambiguous process with conditional decision checkpoints at each section; the skill is non-destructive (it explicitly forbids creating or modifying PRs), so no validation cap applies. It falls short of a 5 because steps are not explicitly sequenced and there is no final self-check.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with a single, clearly signaled one-level reference to the template; no bundle files are needed. Minor organization gap: the body is continuous paragraphs with no section headers delineating scope, process, and output rules.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 correctly third-person, clearly stating what the skill does, but it lacks any 'when to use' trigger clause and only covers a single action. Adding a 'Use when...' phrase with natural variations like 'PR description' would raise both completeness and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks for a pull request or PR description for the FAST repository.'

Include natural synonym phrasings such as 'PR description' or 'draft PR text' to improve trigger term coverage.

Optionally name one more concrete action, such as 'fill out the checklist and test plan sections', to broaden the stated capabilities.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('pull request description for the FAST repository') and one concrete action ('using the provided template'), matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (generate a PR description from the provided template) but no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'pull request', 'description', and 'template' are relevant keywords, but common variations like 'PR', 'PR description', or 'draft PR' are missing, so coverage is partial rather than good.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoping to 'the FAST repository' and its specific template makes it mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against generic PR-creation or git-branch skills.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 suspicious

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

microsoft/fast

Path

.github/skills/fast-pull-request/SKILL.md

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.