pr-submit
Create and submit a GitHub PR from the current branch
65
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
32%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is too terse and lacks the explicit trigger guidance needed for Claude to reliably select it from a large skill library. While it identifies the core action (GitHub PR creation), it omits natural language variations users might employ and provides no 'Use when...' clause to guide skill selection.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'pull request', 'PR', 'merge request', 'push to GitHub', 'submit code for review'
Expand the capability list to include related actions: generating PR descriptions, adding reviewers, setting labels, linking issues
Include file extension or command triggers users might mention: 'gh pr', '.github', 'origin', 'upstream'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (GitHub PR) and two actions (create and submit), but lacks comprehensive detail about what this entails - doesn't mention diff analysis, PR description generation, reviewers, labels, or other PR-related capabilities. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (create/submit PR) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance. Per rubric guidelines, missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 2, and this has no 'when' component at all. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'GitHub PR' and 'branch' which are relevant keywords, but misses common variations users might say like 'pull request', 'merge request', 'push changes', 'open PR', or 'code review'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Fairly specific to GitHub PRs which provides some distinction, but could overlap with general git skills, GitHub issue skills, or code review skills. The 'current branch' detail helps but isn't sufficient for clear differentiation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a reasonably well-structured skill that provides clear workflow steps for creating a GitHub PR. Its main weaknesses are the lack of complete executable command examples and missing validation/error handling checkpoints for operations that could fail (push, PR creation).
Suggestions
Add complete command examples for branch creation (e.g., `git checkout -b <prefix>/<branch-name>`) and PR creation (e.g., `gh pr create --fill` or with specific flags)
Add validation checkpoints after push and PR creation steps, with guidance on handling common failures (e.g., 'If push fails due to no upstream, verify remote exists')
Include the expected output format or how to extract the PR number from gh pr create for use in subsequent commands
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, with no unnecessary explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Every instruction earns its place without padding or verbose context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides specific commands (git status, git diff, gh pr create) but lacks complete executable examples. The instructions describe what to do but don't show exact command syntax for branch creation or the full gh pr create invocation. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced and numbered, but lacks explicit validation checkpoints. No guidance on what to do if push fails, if PR creation fails, or how to verify the PR was created successfully before proceeding to changelog generation. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this size (~25 lines), the structure is appropriate. References to /changelog and /pr-description commands are clear one-level-deep pointers to other skills. Content is well-organized without being monolithic. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.