CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

review-pr

Structured, risk-aware code review of a GitHub pull request using the gh CLI, with diff triage, unresolved-thread suppression, and severity-grouped findings ending in an approve/request-changes verdict.

Quality

87%

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

96%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 operational skill: executable commands with placeholders, explicit failure fallbacks, validation checkpoints, and zero filler. The only structural consideration is that it is a single ~99-line file, which is acceptable but sits just outside the rubric's simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and dense throughout: no explanations of concepts Claude already knows, and every sentence carries non-obvious operational detail (GraphQL line-field semantics, the ±5 suppression window, triage exclusion lists, numeric subagent scaling).

5 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: copy-paste-ready mktemp/gh pr diff freeze commands, a complete paginated GraphQL query, git fetch/diff base-override commands, concrete triage exclusions, and specific agent-count thresholds covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear numbered sequence (freeze → fetch threads → triage → scale → review → report) with explicit validation ('Verify claims against the actual diff; cite file+line for every finding') and feedback loops for error recovery (GraphQL failure fallback, missing-clone fallback, bounded re-fetch after cleanup); the skill is read-only so the destructive-op cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the body contains no dangling references; sections are well-organized (Inputs, Suppression, Workflow, Rules), but at ~99 lines in a single file it exceeds the under-50-line exception for a top score.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

71%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 highly specific, third-person description that comprehensively states what the skill does, but it entirely lacks a 'when to use' trigger clause and omits natural trigger variations like 'PR'. Adding explicit trigger guidance would raise both completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to review a pull request, PR, or GitHub PR, or requests a code review of proposed changes.'

Include natural trigger variations users would say — 'PR', 'review my PR', 'pull request review' — alongside the current keywords.

Consider mentioning the verdict output ('approve / request-changes') as a trigger for 'should I approve this PR?' style requests.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'code review of a GitHub pull request using the gh CLI', 'diff triage', 'unresolved-thread suppression', 'severity-grouped findings', 'approve/request-changes verdict' — with comprehensive coverage of the skill's behavior in third-person voice.

5 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear and detailed, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage ('code review', 'pull request', 'GitHub') but missing common variations users would actually say, such as 'PR', 'review my PR', or 'review my changes'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (GitHub PR review via gh CLI) with distinct triggers, but a generic 'review this code' request could overlap with a general code-review skill, so conflict risk is minor rather than minimal.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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

.omp/agent/managed-skills/review-pr/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.