CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

pr-feedback-quality-gate

Safely track pull request feedback, resolve review comments or merge conflicts, validate fixes, and use a read-only cross-review before committing or pushing follow-up changes.

68

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

92%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 lean, well-structured, and features an explicit validation feedback loop; its only weakness is actionability, where some concrete git/PR commands are implied rather than given.

Suggestions

Add the specific git commands for the commit/push step (e.g., the exact push invocation) to make step 7 copy-paste ready.

Specify how to inspect PR state in step 1 (e.g., the gh CLI commands for comments, reviews, and mergeability).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean procedural guidance that assumes Claude's competence; no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, and every line earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete commands and constraints (e.g., 'pnpm guard', 'Forbid file edits and git write or coordination commands') but omits exact git commit/push and PR-inspection commands, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 7-step workflow with explicit validation (step 4) and an explicit fix-rerun-repeat feedback loop before commit/push, matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

An under-50-line single-purpose skill with no external references and well-organized sections (Workflow, Monitoring cadence, Report), qualifying for the simple-skill score-5 exception.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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.

The description is specific and distinct, naming several concrete PR-feedback actions, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause which caps completeness, and omits the common 'PR' abbreviation.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming the trigger conditions (e.g., 'Use when a PR has review feedback, merge conflicts, or pending checks').

Include the 'PR' abbreviation alongside 'pull request' to match natural user phrasing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions (track feedback, resolve comments/conflicts, validate fixes, cross-review, commit/push) with comprehensive coverage, matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' but no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline; 'when' is only weakly implied.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage ('pull request feedback', 'review comments', 'merge conflicts') but uses the full 'pull request' instead of the common 'PR' abbreviation users would naturally say.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear niche (PR feedback handling) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
nexu-io/open-design
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.