CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

pr-update-desc

Update the PR description for the current branch

Quality

71%

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 ./.agents/skills/pr-update-desc/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 a tightly written, highly actionable runbook: concrete git/gh commands, ordered steps, explicit stop conditions and blocker rules, and a clean single external reference to pr-style. Its few imperfections are the broken default-branch fallback in Step 1, a duplicated `gh pr edit` snippet, and a vestigial Command Template heading — none of which materially impede execution.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely lean and command-driven — it assumes competence with git/gh and never explains background concepts — with only minor trimmable fat: the duplicate `gh pr edit --body "<generated description>"` snippet immediately followed by the HEREDOC version, and the vestigial "## Command Template" heading block. This matches 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed' rather than the every-token-earns-its-place level 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Nearly everything is copy-paste-ready: `gh pr view --json number,url,title,body --jq ...`, `git log --oneline ${default_branch}..HEAD`, `git diff --stat`, and the HEREDOC `gh pr edit --body` pattern, plus first-match-wins template selection rules and an exact report format. Minor gaps keep it from 5: the `git symbolic-ref ... | sed ... || echo "main"` fallback is broken (sed succeeds on empty input, so `|| echo "main"` never fires and default_branch ends up empty), and the body itself is a placeholder.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 0–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit checkpoints: "If no PR exists for the current branch, stop and report", unfilled template sections are "a blocker — report it rather than posting an unfilled template", and ambiguity triggers "ask the user which template applies". It falls short of anchor 5 only because there is no post-update verification or preview/feedback loop before overwriting the existing PR body.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), and the ~107-line body is well organized into numbered sections with a single clearly signaled one-level-deep external reference ("Read ~/.agents/skills/pr-style/SKILL.md"). Minor gaps — the leftover nested "# Update PR Description" heading under "## Command Template" and no true overview section — place it at 'good structure; minor organization gaps' rather than the fully clean split of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 concise and names a clear, concrete capability, but it omits any 'when to use' trigger guidance and lacks natural synonym coverage (pull request, PR body, regenerate). It sits at a solid mid-level: unambiguous what, missing when. Adding an explicit trigger clause and a few synonyms would lift the weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. "Use when the user asks to update, regenerate, or rewrite the PR description for the current branch" — the missing trigger clause currently caps completeness at 3.

Include natural synonyms such as "pull request", "PR body", and "PR summary" so trigger terms cover the phrasings users actually say.

State the regeneration behavior (e.g., "regenerates the description from the branch's commit history") to broaden the specificity of capabilities beyond a single action.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Update the PR description for the current branch" names one concrete, specific action (updating a PR description) scoped to the current branch, matching the '1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor. It is not a 4 because only a single action is listed rather than several specific actions (e.g., regenerate from commits, apply repo template).

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (updates the PR description for the current branch), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance — the cap for a missing 'when' applies. It fits anchor 3 ('clear what, when missing') and not anchor 4, which requires both what and when.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant natural keywords are present ("PR description", "branch") — users would plausibly say "update the PR description" — but common variations and synonyms like "pull request", "PR body", or "PR summary" are missing. This matches 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than the good-coverage anchor at 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is fairly distinct — updating an existing PR's description is a specific operation unlikely to fire for unrelated skills — with only minor overlap risk against closely related PR skills (e.g., PR creation or general PR editing). It is not a 5 because the description carries no explicit distinct triggers and adjacent PR-management skills exist.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

phatblat/dotfiles

Path

.agents/skills/pr-update-desc/SKILL.md

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.