pr-submit
Create and submit a GitHub PR from the current branch
64
45%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
96%
1.92xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.claude/skills/pr-submit/SKILL.mdQuality
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.
The description is concise and identifies a clear action (creating and submitting a GitHub PR), but it lacks a 'Use when...' clause, misses common trigger term variations like 'pull request', and doesn't enumerate the full range of capabilities. It would benefit from expanded trigger terms and explicit usage guidance.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'pull request', 'PR', 'open a PR', 'submit for review', 'merge request'.
Expand the capability list to include related actions such as writing PR descriptions, adding reviewers, setting labels, or linking issues.
Include common keyword variations: 'pull request', 'PR', 'gh pr create', 'push and open PR' to improve trigger term coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (GitHub PR) and two actions (create and submit), but doesn't list additional concrete actions like adding reviewers, setting labels, writing PR descriptions, or linking issues. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (create and submit a GitHub PR) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also fairly thin, placing this at 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'GitHub PR' and 'branch' which are natural terms, but misses common variations like 'pull request', 'merge request', 'open a PR', 'push and create PR', or 'submit for review'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Fairly specific to GitHub PRs which narrows the domain, but could overlap with general Git workflow skills or GitHub issue/review skills. The mention of 'current branch' adds some specificity but not enough to be fully distinct. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a functional but somewhat incomplete PR creation skill. The workflow is logically sequenced and concise enough, but it lacks concrete command examples (especially for gh pr create flags), validation/error handling steps, and explanation of the custom slash commands it references. It reads more like a checklist than a fully actionable skill.
Suggestions
Add concrete, copy-paste-ready command examples, especially for `gh pr create` with common flags (--title, --body, --base)
Add validation checkpoints: verify push succeeded, verify PR was created, handle common errors (e.g., branch already exists, no upstream remote)
Clarify or link to the `/changelog` and `/pr-description` slash commands—these appear to be custom tools but are referenced without context
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary steps like checking git status/diff/log that Claude would naturally do. The instructions are reasonably tight but could be leaner. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides a clear sequence of commands (git status, git diff, gh pr create) but lacks concrete executable examples—no specific command flags for gh pr create, no example branch naming, and references custom slash commands (/changelog, /pr-description) without explaining what they are or how they work. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced and numbered, but there are no validation checkpoints—no check that the push succeeded, no verification that the PR was created successfully, and no error handling if gh pr create fails or if the branch already exists. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a simple, single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, the content is well-organized with clear numbered sections. The structure is appropriate for the scope. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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.
- Repository
- pipecat-ai/pipecat
- Commit
ea296ba
- 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.