speckit-git-remote

Detect Git remote URL for GitHub integration

1.42x

Quality

76%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

98%

1.42x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/speckit-git-remote/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

100%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 exemplary for a simple utility skill: concise, fully executable, clearly sequenced with a validation checkpoint and explicit graceful degradation, and appropriately self-contained with no unnecessary bundle files. No weaknesses surfaced against any dimension.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is ~50 lean lines with zero padding: it teaches only what Claude cannot already infer (the project's expected URL formats, the warning format, the graceful-degradation contract). Every section and token earns its place, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is copy-paste ready and executable: `git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null` for the prerequisite check, `git config --get remote.origin.url` for execution, and concrete HTTPS/SSH URL examples (`https://github.com/<owner>/<repo>.git`, `git@github.com:<owner>/<repo>.git`) covering the common cases. No pseudocode or missing key details.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	For this simple single-task skill the sequence is unambiguous: prerequisite validation (Git availability check with an explicit fallback warning), execution, output parsing rules, and graceful degradation. It includes an explicit verification checkpoint ("ONLY report a GitHub repository if the remote URL actually points to github.com") and a no-error degradation path, so no validation gaps remain.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with a single task and no external references needed; per the rubric's simple-skills note, well-organized sections (Prerequisites, Execution, Output, Graceful Degradation) suffice for a top score. There are no bundle files, so nothing is inlined that belongs elsewhere and no nested references exist.	5 / 5
	Total	20 / 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 communicates a clear, concrete purpose but is minimal: it answers "what" tersely and omits any "when to use" guidance, which caps completeness. Trigger coverage lacks common variations users would naturally say. Two focused additions — a trigger clause and a few more specific actions/keywords — would lift it substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when a workflow needs the repository owner/name or must verify the remote points to GitHub." This removes the completeness cap and strengthens trigger-term quality.

Mention the concrete outcomes — extracting owner and repository name and checking whether the remote is github.com — to raise specificity from one action to several.

Include natural variations such as "git remote origin", "repo URL", or "SSH/HTTPS remote" so users' phrasings match the description.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Detect Git remote URL for GitHub integration" names the domain (Git remote / GitHub integration) and one concrete action (detect the remote URL), but stops there — no mention of parsing owner/repo, checking origin, or handling SSH vs HTTPS. It names the domain with 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage, matching the score-3 anchor; score 4 would require several specific actions listed.	3 / 5
Completeness	The description has a clear "what" (detect the Git remote URL for GitHub integration) but no "when" at all — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which the judging guidelines explicitly cap at 3. Score 2 would require the "what" itself to be vague, which it is not.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant keywords are present ("Git", "remote URL", "GitHub"), but common natural variations users would say are missing — e.g., "origin", "repo URL", "git remote -v", "SSH remote". Some relevant keywords with missing variations matches the score-3 anchor rather than score 4's good coverage.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is fairly distinct — detecting the Git remote URL specifically for GitHub integration is unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills, with only minor overlap risk against general Git/GitHub workflow skills. Mostly distinct with minor overlap matches the score-4 anchor; score 5 would demand a clearer niche signal with distinct trigger phrases.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: mixpanel/mixpanel-headless
Path: .claude/skills/speckit-git-remote/SKILL.md
Commit: aa4e414

Reviewed: 1 day 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.