CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

babysit-pr

Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep watching open PRs so fresh review feedback is surfaced promptly. Use when the user asks Codex to monitor a PR, watch CI, handle review comments, or keep an eye on failures and feedback on an open PR.

79

1.72x
Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

95%

1.72x

Average score across 2 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.codex/skills/babysit-pr/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 highly actionable and well-sequenced with explicit validation and stop conditions, and it correctly uses one-level-deep reference files. Its main weakness is conciseness: several critical rules (restart --watch after push, green-is-not-a-stop) are restated across many sections, inflating the token budget.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated 'restart --watch immediately after a push' rule into a single canonical statement (e.g. one Git Safety bullet) and reference it once instead of restating it in 5+ places.

Collapse the duplicated 'green + mergeable is a progress milestone, not a stop condition' guidance into one place (Stop Conditions) rather than repeating in Objective, Core Workflow, Monitoring Loop, and Output Expectations.

Move the detailed CI failure classification heuristics and the GitHub state mutation policy into dedicated reference files, keeping SKILL.md a lean overview that links to them, to improve progressive disclosure and token efficiency.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence (no basic concept explanations), but key instructions are repeated many times — 'restart --watch immediately after the push' (steps 13/38, lines 110, 148, 169, 209) and 'green is not a stop condition' recur across sections, which could be tightened into a single authoritative rule.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready commands (`python3 .codex/skills/babysit-pr/scripts/gh_pr_watch.py --pr auto --watch`, specific `gh run view`/`gh api` invocations) and concrete commit-message defaults, with only minor gaps where the full set of watcher `actions` values must be inferred from script output.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Monitoring Loop Pattern and Git Safety Rules give a clearly sequenced multi-step process with explicit validation checkpoints ('Before editing, check for unrelated uncommitted changes', re-run watcher after push, strict Stop Conditions), including feedback loops for the destructive push/mutate operations; minor redundancy keeps it just below a 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Real one-level-deep references exist and are clearly signaled (`.codex/skills/babysit-pr/references/heuristics.md`, `github-api-notes.md`, plus the watcher scripts), with well-organized sections; however the SKILL.md body is a ~220-line manual with substantial inline detail (CI classification, state-mutation policy) that could be partly split into reference files.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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, complete, and well-scoped to a distinct niche, clearly stating both capabilities and explicit use-when triggers. It is somewhat verbose for a description but each clause earns its place; a few additional synonyms could round out trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state', 'Diagnose failures', 'retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times', 'auto-fix/push branch-related issues' — giving comprehensive coverage rather than generic language.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (poll review/CI/mergeability, diagnose, retry, auto-fix, keep watching) and 'when' via a concrete 'Use when the user asks Codex to monitor a PR, watch CI, handle review comments...' trigger clause.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural user phrasing — 'monitor a PR', 'watch CI', 'handle review comments', 'keep an eye on failures and feedback' — with good coverage, though a few synonyms (e.g. 'babysit', 'keep an eye on') are only partially represented as triggers.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (post-creation PR babysitting with CI/review/mergeability monitoring) with distinct triggers, making overlap with other skills minimal.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
openai/codex
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.