CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

implement-suggestion

Implements review-comment suggestions across one or more PRs. Multi-PR mode (default when $ARGUMENTS holds PR URLs; empty $ARGUMENTS auto-detects the active PR) resolves a worktree per PR, fetches every actionable comment from human teammates AND AI review bots (claude[bot], coderabbitai[bot], …), validates each through /critical + /confidence, builds a structured suggestion-pack, and dispatches a worker subagent that applies each approved change as its own commit, pushes to the existing branch, and resolves the addressed thread — so every handled comment ends resolved and the PR is left clean. Free-text mode applies a single pasted suggestion in place. --watch re-applies on one PR until the reviewers go quiet (max 5 iterations); --resolve-all also replies to and resolves every non-fix thread it can honestly close. Triggers on "implement suggestion", "apply review comments", "/implement-suggestion".

66

Quality

83%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

73%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.

This is a strong orchestrator skill body: an unambiguous phased workflow with exceptional validation gates and concrete commands throughout. Its weaknesses are token efficiency — the same rules are restated across multiple sections — and a bundle that ships only SKILL.md while deferring key procedures to rule files that are not present alongside it.

Suggestions

State each --resolve-all disposition rule once (the Mode Detection table plus Hard Rules) and let Phases 3/5/6 reference it, rather than restating the full behavior in every section.

Cite 'rules/handoff.md#worker-prompt-template' once in Phase 6 and remove the two near-verbatim repeat citations in the same section.

Move the full outcome-emit memory.write schemas fully into rules/self-improvement-loop.md (or the shared rule file) and keep only a one-line pointer plus the verdict/relevance table in SKILL.md, eliminating the duplication between the 'Outcome emit' and 'Self-Improvement' sections.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly dense and purposeful, but repetition is noticeable across the ~540 lines: the --resolve-all disposition rules are restated in at least four places (Mode Detection table, Phase 3 treatment table, Phase 5 pack section, Phase 6 worker pass, Hard Rules), the link 'rules/handoff.md#worker-prompt-template' is cited three times in Phase 6 alone, and the outcome-emit memory-write details appear nearly verbatim in both the 'Outcome emit' section and the 'Self-Improvement' section. Not 4: the duplication is more than minor trimming — consolidating to one canonical statement per rule (plus the Hard Rules) would cut a meaningful fraction of the document; not 2: there is no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows, and most sections earn their tokens.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance dominates: exact gh calls ('gh pr view --json number,state,headRefName,headRefOid,isDraft', 'gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<n>/reviews'), 'gw checkout <pr-url-or-number>', 'git status --porcelain' clean-state checks, a full /confidence decision matrix, a copy-ready jq/grep one-liner for won't-fix language, and shaped memory.write calls. Not 5: several load-bearing specifics (worker prompt template, input parsing grammar, gate procedures) are deferred to rules/*.md files that are not present in this bundle, and the Agent() dispatch is illustrative rather than copy-paste ready — minor gaps remain for a reader with only SKILL.md.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The eight phases are explicitly sequenced with per-phase outputs, and validation checkpoints are everywhere: refuse MERGED/CLOSED PRs, worktree clean-state + HEAD==headRefOid verification, the two-gate /critical → /confidence validation with a numeric decision matrix and a non-removable Must-fix override, contradiction detection before dispatch, worker pre-push checks, non-fatal failure handling for resolve passes, CI-red as an explicit stop reason under --watch, and a Phase 7 report that audits applied/surfaced/skipped/resolved. Error-recovery and feedback loops (push retries, watch-loop baseline advancement) match the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The file declares itself a 'thin index' and delivers: a 'Source of truth' note, a Rules table mapping each rule file to the phase when it loads, phase-directed load instructions ('load it now when --watch is set'), and one-level-deep references to rules/*.md and templates/*.md. Not 5: some detailed content that arguably belongs in those rule files is inlined and duplicated (the outcome-emit memory schemas, --resolve-all dispositions), and several references point outside the skill directory to ../../../agents/shared/rules/*.md, while the bundle itself ships only SKILL.md — the referenced files cannot be verified as present. Not 3: the structure, navigation, and signaling are clearly good and the heavy machinery is genuinely split out.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 exemplary: third-person, concrete, comprehensive over all three modes, and closes with explicit trigger phrases. The only weakness is a somewhat narrow trigger list that omits natural synonyms users might say.

Suggestions

Add one or two trigger synonyms such as 'address PR comments' or 'fix review feedback' to the Triggers-on clause so users phrasing the request differently still match.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple specific concrete actions with comprehensive coverage: 'resolves a worktree per PR, fetches every actionable comment from human teammates AND AI review bots (claude[bot], coderabbitai[bot], …), validates each through /critical + /confidence, builds a structured suggestion-pack, and dispatches a worker subagent that applies each approved change as its own commit, pushes to the existing branch, and resolves the addressed thread'. Both auxiliary modes (--watch, --resolve-all, free-text) are also covered. Not 4: coverage is comprehensive with no real gaps; not below: every verb names a concrete mechanism, not a generic abstraction.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: 'what' is detailed exhaustively (worktree per PR, comment fetch, two-gate validation, suggestion-pack, worker commits/push/thread-resolution) and 'when' is explicit via 'Triggers on "implement suggestion", "apply review comments", "/implement-suggestion"' plus mode-conditional guidance (PR URLs, empty $ARGUMENTS, free text). Matches the 5 anchor exactly: concrete trigger phrases accompany a full what-description.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Explicit triggers are present and natural: 'Triggers on "implement suggestion", "apply review comments", "/implement-suggestion"' — phrases a user would plausibly say. Not 5: common variations and synonyms are missing (e.g., 'address PR comments', 'fix review feedback', 'apply reviewer suggestions', 'resolve comments'); not 3: the given terms are natural user phrasings, not just technical jargon.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche — implementing/validating review-comment suggestions on existing PRs without opening new PRs ('pushes to the existing branch… without opening a new PR' territory, and explicit 'never invokes gh pr create' semantics carried by 'pushes to the existing branch'). Its triggers ('implement suggestion', 'apply review comments') are unlikely to fire for adjacent skills like PR review or CI fixing. Not 4: the niche and triggers are distinct with minimal overlap risk.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

68%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 11 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (580 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 29 missing, 7 suspicious

Warning

Total

11

/

16

Passed

Repository
mthines/agent-skills
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.