CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

gh-issues

Fetch GitHub issues, spawn sub-agents to implement fixes and open PRs, then monitor and address PR review comments. Usage: /gh-issues [owner/repo] [--label bug] [--limit 5] [--milestone v1.0] [--assignee @me] [--fork user/repo] [--watch] [--interval 5] [--reviews-only] [--cron] [--dry-run] [--model glm-5] [--notify-channel -1002381931352]

64

Quality

80%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./apps/desktop/static/bundled-skills/gh-issues/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%

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

A highly actionable, clearly sequenced orchestration skill with strong validation and feedback loops, but it is a long monolith whose token-resolution and auth-header blocks are repeated several times and whose large sub-agent prompt templates are inline rather than split into reference files. Tightening the repetition and extracting the prompt templates would improve both conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Factor the repeated token-resolution and curl-auth-header snippets into a single shared block referenced once, instead of restating them in Phase 2 and both sub-agent prompts (including the redundant bash-then-node fallback).

Move the two large sub-agent task prompts (Phase 5 fix prompt and Step 6.5 review prompt) into reference files (e.g. FIX_PROMPT.md, REVIEW_PROMPT.md) and link to them one level deep to improve progressive disclosure.

Trim explanatory asides that restate what a step prevents (e.g. the claim-tracking rationale) to assume Claude's competence and reduce token weight.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly operational but very long (~34KB) with repeated blocks — token resolution appears in Phase 2 and twice in the fix sub-agent prompt (bash jq and node variants) plus the review prompt, and the curl auth header is restated throughout — so it could be tightened; it is not a 1 because it avoids fluffy concept explanation, and not a 3 because of the repetition.

2 / 3

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and executable — exact curl calls with headers, git commands, jq filters, and file paths with documented template variables — rather than pseudocode or missing details, matching the score-3 anchor; the template placeholders are standard orchestration substitution, not the pseudocode of the score-2 anchor.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Six numbered phases run in fixed sequence with explicit validation checkpoints — Phase 4's seven pre-flight checks, the confidence-check stop threshold, and test-and-retry feedback loops — satisfying the score-3 anchor for clear sequencing with validation; it is not capped at 2 because validation is present for this batch/destructive operation.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

It is a single monolithic file well over 50 lines with no bundle files or external references, and the two large sub-agent prompt templates are inline content that could be split out; it is not a 1 because section headers and numbered steps keep it well-organized, and not a 3 because no content is offloaded to one-level-deep reference files.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

82%

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 specific, action-oriented description with good natural trigger terms and a clear niche, weakened only by the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause — the 'Usage:' line documents invocation syntax rather than when to invoke the skill. The deployment-specific flag values (e.g. a literal Telegram channel ID) add noise without aiding discoverability.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause (e.g. 'Use when the user wants to auto-fix GitHub issues, open PRs for them, or address PR review comments') so completeness can reach 3.

Replace the deployment-specific example values in the flag list (notably the literal Telegram channel ID '-1002381931352' and '--model glm-5') with generic placeholders so the description stays general-purpose.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The leading sentence lists multiple concrete actions — 'Fetch GitHub issues, spawn sub-agents to implement fixes and open PRs, then monitor and address PR review comments' — matching the score-3 anchor of several specific concrete actions rather than the domain-only score-2 anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' but the only 'when' guidance is a 'Usage:' CLI-syntax line, not an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 2; it is not a 1 because the 'what' is strong and a usage hint is present.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a user would say are present — 'GitHub issues', 'fixes', 'PRs', 'PR review comments' — giving good coverage; it is not a 2 because the core domain terms are well covered rather than missing common variations, though the trailing CLI flag list is syntax rather than triggers.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'gh-issues' auto-fixing GitHub issues into PRs is a clear, distinct niche with the '/gh-issues' command trigger, making overlap with other skills unlikely; it is not a 2 because the domain and trigger are specific rather than broadly overlapping.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Validation

75%

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

Validation12 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (867 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

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

Total

12

/

16

Passed

Repository
nexu-io/nexu
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.