open-source-maintainer
End-to-end GitHub repository maintenance for open-source projects. Use when asked to triage issues, review PRs, analyze contributor activity, generate maintenance reports, or maintain a repository. Triggers include "triage", "maintain", "review PRs", "analyze issues", "repo maintenance", "what needs attention", "open source maintenance", or any request to understand and act on GitHub issues/PRs. Supports human-in-the-loop workflows with persistent memory across sessions.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:numman-ali/n-skills --skill open-source-maintainerOverall
score
92%
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-crafted skill description that excels across all dimensions. It provides specific concrete actions, comprehensive trigger terms that users would naturally use, explicit 'Use when' and 'Triggers include' clauses, and a clearly defined niche around GitHub open-source maintenance. The description uses proper third-person voice throughout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'triage issues, review PRs, analyze contributor activity, generate maintenance reports, or maintain a repository'. These are clear, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('triage issues, review PRs, analyze contributor activity, generate maintenance reports') and when ('Use when asked to...' with explicit trigger list). Includes a dedicated 'Triggers include' clause with specific keywords. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'triage', 'maintain', 'review PRs', 'analyze issues', 'repo maintenance', 'what needs attention', 'open source maintenance'. Includes both technical and conversational phrasings. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused on GitHub repository maintenance for open-source projects. The specific triggers like 'triage', 'repo maintenance', and 'open source maintenance' create a distinct domain unlikely to conflict with general coding or document skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured skill for complex repository maintenance with strong workflow clarity and excellent progressive disclosure through the reference router pattern. The actionability is high with concrete commands and file structures. Minor verbosity in the operating principles and interaction model sections prevents a perfect conciseness score, but overall this is a high-quality skill body.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy (e.g., the operating contract and interaction model sections overlap conceptually). The reference router table and gates section could be consolidated. However, it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable commands for the triage script with multiple flag options. The workflow stages are specific with clear file paths, the citation format is precise, and the per-repo state structure is fully specified with exact filenames and purposes. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-stage workflow (Setup → Capture → Analyze → Synthesize → Align → Execute → Record) is clearly sequenced with explicit human approval gates. The 'Gates (Read-Before-Acting)' section provides validation checkpoints before risky operations like public comments or closures. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent use of progressive disclosure with a reference router table that specifies exactly when to load each reference file. The skill clearly separates overview content from detailed references (7 separate reference files), with one-level-deep navigation and clear signaling. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
87%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 14 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
Total | 14 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.