CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

miro-code-review

Use when the user wants to create a visual code review on a Miro board from a pull/merge request (GitHub, GitLab, or any forge), local uncommitted changes, or a branch comparison — produces a file-changes table, summary/architecture/security docs, and architecture diagrams, then links them back from the PR/MR.

84

1.39x
Quality

78%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

1.39x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./claude-plugins/miro/skills/miro-code-review/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is miro-code-review in miroapp/miro-ai

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

56%

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

This is a comprehensive, well-structured skill for a complex multi-platform workflow. Its greatest strength is the thorough triage system (§4.5) that prevents unnecessary artifact creation, and the platform-agnostic design with concrete CLI examples. Its main weakness is significant verbosity — many sections explain things inline that are also delegated to reference files, and Claude's existing knowledge of git, URL construction, and markdown is over-explained. The skill would benefit from aggressive trimming of inline content that duplicates the referenced files.

Suggestions

Remove inline duplication of content that is already delegated to reference files (e.g., trim the diagram marking convention explanation in §5 to a single sentence pointing to references/diagram-conventions.md, same for linking conventions and source-links.md).

Cut explanations of concepts Claude already knows: git commands like `git symbolic-ref`, URL construction patterns, markdown link syntax, and how CLI tools work. Keep only the project-specific decisions and templates.

Add a brief validation step after Miro artifact creation (e.g., 'Verify the table/document/diagram was created by checking the MCP tool response before proceeding to the next artifact').

Consolidate the scaling guidelines table and the diagram selection table — they partially overlap and could be merged into a single decision matrix to reduce token count.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is extremely verbose at ~400+ lines with significant repetition. The triage rules, linking conventions, and diagram conventions are explained in exhaustive detail inline despite being referenced to external files. Many sections re-explain concepts (e.g., the before/after diagram logic is stated in multiple places). Claude doesn't need this level of hand-holding for concepts like URL construction, git commands, or markdown link syntax.

2 / 5

Actionability

The skill provides concrete, executable CLI commands for GitHub and GitLab, specific table column definitions, clear decision trees for artifact selection, and detailed examples. Minor gaps exist — the REST fallback is vague ('issue an authenticated curl'), and some Miro MCP tool interactions are described abstractly ('pass placement to the Miro MCP tools per their schemas') rather than with concrete invocations.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is well-sequenced (identify source → extract changes → analyze → triage → create → post link) with clear decision points and a bail-out rule. The triage step (§4.5) with its announce-before-creating pattern is a good validation checkpoint. However, there's no explicit error recovery or validation after Miro artifact creation (e.g., verifying the board content was created successfully), and the PR description update has only a partial fallback (comment instead of edit) without a retry loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references 7 external files in a references/ directory for detailed templates, conventions, and commands — which is good structural intent. However, no bundle files were provided, so we cannot verify these references exist or are well-structured. More critically, the SKILL.md itself inlines substantial detail that it simultaneously delegates to reference files (e.g., diagram marking conventions are explained at length in §5 AND referenced to diagram-conventions.md; linking conventions are detailed inline AND referenced to source-links.md). This duplication undermines the progressive disclosure pattern.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

100%

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

This is an excellent skill description that clearly communicates what the skill does and when to use it. It provides comprehensive trigger terms covering multiple platforms (GitHub, GitLab), input types (PRs, local changes, branch comparisons), and output artifacts (tables, docs, diagrams). The description occupies a clear, distinctive niche at the intersection of Miro boards and code review visualization.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions: creating a file-changes table, summary/architecture/security docs, architecture diagrams, and linking back from the PR/MR. Also specifies multiple input sources (pull/merge request, local uncommitted changes, branch comparison). Comprehensive coverage of capabilities.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (produces file-changes table, summary/architecture/security docs, architecture diagrams, links them back from PR/MR) and 'when' (starts with 'Use when the user wants to create a visual code review on a Miro board from a pull/merge request...'). Clear trigger phrases are provided.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms: 'code review', 'Miro board', 'pull request', 'merge request', 'GitHub', 'GitLab', 'PR/MR', 'uncommitted changes', 'branch comparison', 'architecture diagrams'. Includes synonyms and platform variations users would naturally mention.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive niche combining Miro boards with code review visualization. The specific combination of Miro + code review + PR/MR context makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills like generic code review, generic Miro, or generic Git skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
miroapp/miro-ai
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.