changelog

Create changelog files for important commits in a PR

1.58x

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.58x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

87%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is concise, highly actionable, and well-organized for a simple single-purpose skill, with concrete commands and a worked example. Its main gap is the absence of any validation or verification step for a batch file-writing operation, which caps workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification checkpoint after generating files, e.g. re-run `git log main..HEAD --oneline` and confirm one changelog file exists per significant commit.

Include a short step to validate each file's first line starts with `- ` and uses an allowed change type before finishing.

Optionally add a one-line sanity check to confirm no changelog was created for skipped categories (docs-only, test-only, CI, refactoring).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and direct: a concrete git command, an enumerated file-naming format, and tight good/bad examples, with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching 'Lean and efficient; every token earns its place'. Not 2 because the extended user-facing-framing section is substantive guidance rather than unnecessary explanation.	3 / 3
Actionability	It gives an executable git command, an exact filename scheme with all allowed change types enumerated, and a fully worked PR #3519 example, matching 'Fully executable code/commands; specific examples; copy-paste ready'. Not 2 because guidance is complete and concrete rather than pseudocode; there is no level above 3.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The numbered sequence is clear, but this is a batch file-writing operation with no validation or verification checkpoint (e.g., confirming which commits are truly significant, or verifying each generated file matches the format), so per the scoring notes workflow clarity is capped at 2. Not 3 because explicit validation steps are absent; not 1 because the sequence itself is well-ordered.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, has no bundle files, and is organized into clear 'Instructions' and 'Example' sections, so per the scoring notes progressive disclosure scores 3 with well-organized sections alone. Not 2 because there is no inline content that should be split out; there is no level above 3.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

57%

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 clearly states what the skill does and carves out a distinct niche, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and lists only a single action, limiting completeness and specificity. Adding trigger phrasing and one or two more concrete actions would raise the score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when finalizing a PR and the user asks for changelog entries or release notes.'

Broaden trigger terms to include natural variations like 'release notes', 'change log', or 'what changed in this PR'.

Name one or two additional concrete actions (e.g. 'skip non-user-facing commits and write one file per change type') to improve specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain ('changelog files') and one concrete action ('Create') tied to PR commits, but does not list multiple specific concrete actions, matching the anchor for 'Names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive'. It is not 3 because only a single action is named, and not 1 because the action is concrete rather than vague.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill does but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 2 ('Has what, but when is missing or only implied'). Not 3 because there is no explicit when-to-use guidance; not 1 because the 'what' is clearly stated.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'changelog', 'commits', and 'PR' are ones a user would naturally say, but common variations such as 'release notes', 'change log', or 'what changed' are missing, matching 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations'. Not 3 because coverage is not broad; not 1 because the keywords are natural rather than jargon.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Changelog-file generation for PR commits is a clear, narrow niche unlikely to trigger the wrong skill, matching 'Clear niche with distinct triggers; unlikely to conflict'. Not 2 because it is more specific than 'Works with document files'-style overlap, and there is no level above 3.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 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: pipecat-ai/pipecat
Commit: 037ee5d

Reviewed: 4 days 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.