CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

post-review-pickup

Authoritative protocol for next-lane pickup after ANY PR-lifecycle event boundary (review post, author response, implementation completion, PR open/update, ticket create, blocked-state resolution) AND for pre-review intake lane discovery from fresh boot or watchdog wake when no author lane is active. Prevents silent idle and reviewer-only cycles by requiring active lane selection or a review-first rationale per §15.6 self-select mandate. Triggers: Use immediately after posting a PR review, chaining a formal GitHub review state, sending an author review-response commentId handoff, completing a discrete implementation chunk, opening/updating a PR, creating a ticket via create_issue, resolving a previously blocked state (positive-path exit only; new blockers route to bug/follow-up plus next lane), OR before accepting the first PR review/re-review request in a fresh session/wake when no current author or implementation lane is claimed.

59

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 ./.agents/skills/post-review-pickup/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The body functions as a lean redirect that correctly points to a real, one-level-deep workflow reference, but it duplicates the description's trigger enumeration and surfaces no actual workflow, sequencing, or navigation to the other three reference files. It is actionable as a pointer yet thin on the substance the rubric rewards.

Suggestions

Replace the re-enumerated trigger list in the body with a brief pointer back to the description's triggers, and add a short one-line summary of what the pickup protocol actually does so the body carries some standalone actionability.

Add a small 'References' section listing all four reference files with one-line purposes, so author-concentration-detector.md, authorship-capability-floor.md, and pre-review-intake-lane-gate.md are discoverable from SKILL.md rather than only the workflow file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is short and does not explain concepts Claude already knows, but it re-enumerates the full lifecycle-event trigger list ('PR review, author response handoff, implementation completion, PR open/update, ticket create, or blocked-state resolution') that already appears verbatim in the description and pads with 'MUST immediately' / 'strictly adhere', matching the level-2 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor rather than the level-3 'every token earns its place' anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

It gives a concrete, executable directive — 'use the `view_file` tool to read and strictly adhere to `.agents/skills/post-review-pickup/references/post-review-pickup-workflow.md`' — but all substantive actionability is deferred to the reference with no in-body summary of what to do, matching level-2 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' rather than level-3 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' or level-1 'vague, describes rather than instructs'.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The body provides a single clear directive with a defined boundary ('before proceeding or ending the turn'), but the actual multi-step pickup workflow is delegated entirely to the reference file with no sequenced steps or checkpoints visible in the body, so it sits at level-2 rather than level-3's 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps'.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body signals one clearly one-level-deep reference (post-review-pickup-workflow.md, which exists) with an explicit path, but three other reference files in references/ (author-concentration-detector.md, authorship-capability-floor.md, pre-review-intake-lane-gate.md) have no navigation entry point from the overview, matching level-2 'references present but not clearly signaled' rather than level-3 'easy navigation' to all reference content.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Description

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 highly specific and complete, clearly answering both what the skill does and when to use it with a distinct, low-conflict niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term quality: the trigger language leans heavily on internal protocol jargon rather than phrases a user would naturally say.

Suggestions

Rewrite the 'Triggers' clause using natural user-facing phrasings (e.g. 'Use after you post a PR review', 'Use when opening or updating a PR') and move internal terms like 'commentId handoff', '§15.6 self-select mandate', and 'positive-path exit only' into the reference rather than the description.

Trim the dense parenthetical event enumeration so the description stays scannable; the core triggers can be conveyed more concisely without losing completeness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions and event types — 'next-lane pickup after ANY PR-lifecycle event boundary (review post, author response, implementation completion, PR open/update, ticket create, blocked-state resolution)' and 'pre-review intake lane discovery' — matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than the level-2 'some actions, not comprehensive' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

It states both what ('Authoritative protocol for next-lane pickup ... AND for pre-review intake lane discovery') and when ('Triggers: Use immediately after ... OR before accepting the first PR review/re-review request'), matching the level-3 anchor that requires explicit triggers rather than the level-2 anchor where 'when is missing or only implied'.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

The explicit 'Triggers: Use immediately after posting a PR review, ... opening/updating a PR, creating a ticket via create_issue' provides recognizable events, but the language is dominated by internal jargon a user would not naturally say ('commentId handoff', '§15.6 self-select mandate', 'watchdog wake', 'positive-path exit only'), so it is not the level-3 'natural terms users would say' anchor and sits above level-1's 'no natural keywords'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The skill occupies a narrow niche — PR-lifecycle event-boundary lane pickup and pre-review intake lane discovery — with highly specific triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the level-3 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor rather than the level-2 'could still overlap' anchor.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
neomjs/neo
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.