close-out

Close the loop after a factory pull request merges by summarising it on its issue, closing the issue, and recording the remediated finding's pull request. Use as the action for a `github:pull_request.closed` trigger where the pull request merged from a `factory/` branch.

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

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.

An exemplary short skill body: token-efficient, precisely sequenced, and guarded with explicit input validation and a do-not section. The only improvement space is supplying command forms for the GitHub-facing actions that currently rely on prose description.

Suggestions

In step 2, give the command forms for the GitHub actions, e.g. `gh issue comment <number> --body ...` and `gh issue close <number>` / label removal via `gh issue edit <number> --remove-label factory`, so every outward-facing step is copy-paste ready like the tessl commands.

Name how to obtain the merge commit and PR details (e.g. from the trigger event's payload fields) so the summary comment's contents are fully derivable without improvisation.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean and efficient across ~20 lines: no known-concept explanations, no padding; every line instructs an action or a guard ('Do not reopen, revert or edit the merged code').	5 / 5
Actionability	Concrete executable commands for the finding steps ('tessl finding view <id> --json', 'tessl finding link add <id> --type pull_request --url <url> --json') and exact input paths, but issue commenting, label removal, and merge-commit lookup are described without command forms — minor gaps matching anchor 4 rather than fully copy-paste-ready anchor 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear four-step sequence with an explicit input-validation gate ('Require one pull_request.closed event with payload.pull_request.merged true...; otherwise stop without changes') and a conditional checkpoint in step 3; the one-summary-comment guard covers the only outward-facing repeat risk, and code edits are explicitly forbidden, so no destructive/batch cap applies.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist or are needed; the body is a short, well-organized single-purpose skill with clear Inputs/Procedure/Do-not sections, which per the simple-skill guideline merits a 5.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

87%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.

A strong description: it states multiple concrete actions, gives an explicit and precise trigger condition, and occupies a distinct niche. The only weakness is slightly incomplete action coverage relative to the body's full procedure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several specific concrete actions — 'summarising it on its issue, closing the issue, and recording the remediated finding's pull request' — but omits coverage of label removal and the deferred-work follow-up present in the body, so it falls short of comprehensive anchor 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	Both what and when are explicit: the 'when' clause names the concrete trigger — 'Use as the action for a `github:pull_request.closed` trigger where the pull request merged from a `factory/` branch' — fully matching the anchor-5 example with concrete trigger conditions, clearly above anchor 4.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural keyword coverage ('pull request merges', 'issue', 'github:pull_request.closed', 'factory/ branch') tied to the exact automation trigger, but no synonyms or variant phrasings beyond the single event form, matching anchor 4.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche (factory pull request close-out after merge) with distinct, tightly scoped triggers (branch prefix, merged flag, remediated finding), giving minimal conflict risk with any other skill.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: perihelionhq/perihelion-platform-context
Path: plugins/canonical-workflow/skills/close-out/SKILL.md
Commit: caafac3

Reviewed: 19 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.