CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

pr-change-requester

Reviews GitHub Pull Requests/Merge Requests and generates a clean, actionable GitHub Flavored Markdown (GFM) checklist of requested changes. Use this skill when you need a clear, easy-to-understand review summary that developers can copy directly into a PR review, issue, or markdown file.

Quality

84%

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

86%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.

A lean, highly actionable instruction-only skill: concrete commands, a precise copy-paste GFM template, clear grouping into Blockers/Improvements/Nits, and a coherent review workflow. The only trims are the Philosophy quotes and an optional output-verification checkpoint.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and well-sectioned with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. The four-quote "Philosophy" list is motivational padding that could be trimmed or folded into the Goal, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable: a concrete diff command (`git diff target..HEAD`), exact GFM output template with task lists, alert callouts, file/line reference format, and Before/After suggested-change snippets. The template is copy-paste ready and covers the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Four clearly sequenced steps (DIFF INSPECTION, FILTER & GROUP, GENERATE MARKDOWN, SAVE) with the "Never include unverified file paths or fabricate line numbers" constraint acting as a checkpoint. It sits at 4 rather than 5 because there is no explicit verify-output step (e.g., confirming line numbers against the diff before emitting the report).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Single-file skill with no bundle files; every section (Goal, Constraints, Dimensions, Instructions, Output Format) is core content that earns its place, nothing that belongs in a separate reference is inlined, and clear headers make navigation easy.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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.

A solid description with third-person voice, concrete actions, an explicit output format, and a 'Use when' clause. The 'when' could name concrete user triggers (e.g., 'when the user asks to review a PR or requests changes') and the 'what' could enumerate the review dimensions to strengthen both completeness and specificity.

Suggestions

Make the 'when' clause trigger on concrete user requests, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to review a pull/merge request, requests changes on a PR, or wants PR feedback as a markdown checklist.'

Briefly enumerate what the review covers (bugs, missing tests, maintainability, performance) so the 'what' is comprehensive rather than implied by 'reviews'.

Add high-frequency natural keywords such as 'code review' and 'diff' to reduce missed triggers.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Reviews GitHub Pull Requests/Merge Requests and generates a clean, actionable GitHub Flavored Markdown (GFM) checklist of requested changes" lists specific actions with a concrete output artifact and format, but stops short of the comprehensive coverage a 5 would show (e.g., it omits what the review looks for — bugs, test coverage, performance).

4 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: a clear third-person "what" (reviews PRs/MRs and generates a GFM checklist of requested changes) and an explicit "Use this skill when..." clause. The 'when' is framed around the user needing a summary rather than concrete user triggers like 'when the user asks to review a PR or requests changes', which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms like "Pull Requests", "Merge Requests", "PR review", "checklist", and "markdown file" give good keyword coverage including the PR/MR synonym pair, but common phrasings such as "code review" and "diff" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The PR/MR review niche and distinctive GFM-checklist output format make it mostly distinct, but it carries minor overlap risk with general code-review skills that would trigger on similar review requests.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

nekomangaorg/Neko

Path

.agents/skills/prchanger/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.