CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

act-on-feedback

Act on user feedback attached to the current session. Use when the user submits feedback on the session's changes via the Submit Feedback button.

69

Quality

84%

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

86%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.

A tight, well-sequenced instruction skill that names the exact tools to call and includes a verification step. The main gap is the absence of an explicit validate-then-retry feedback loop and concrete tool invocation examples, which cap actionability and workflow_clarity just below the top anchor.

Suggestions

Add a concrete example invocation for at least one tool (e.g., `listComments` with expected return shape) to lift actionability toward fully executable guidance.

Insert an explicit error-recovery feedback loop after the verification step (e.g., 'If verification finds inconsistencies, fix them and re-verify before resolving comments') to support the batch/destructive nature of resolving or deleting multiple comments.

Optionally clarify what 'act on' entails in step 4 by listing the concrete edit actions, which would also let the description's specificity claim more sub-actions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and direct — a single context line plus six terse numbered steps — with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows and every line earning its place, matching the 'lean and efficient; assumes competence' anchor.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete tool names are given in backticks (`listComments`, `resolveComments`, `deleteComments`) with clear actions and a comment-id matching detail, but no example invocations or parameters are shown — 'mostly executable guidance with minor gaps' rather than copy-paste-ready anchor 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Six clearly sequenced steps with an explicit verification checkpoint (step 6: 'Verify your changes are consistent with the rest of the codebase') and branching logic (step 2); the missing explicit error-recovery/retry loop keeps it at 'clear sequence, most checkpoints, minor validation gaps' rather than anchor 5. The destructive/batch cap at 3 does not apply because a verification step is present.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A short single-purpose skill (under 50 lines) needing no external references, organized as a heading plus a numbered list — matching the guideline that such skills can score 5 with just well-organized sections; no bundle files exist to verify.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

82%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 concise, well-constructed description that clearly states both capability and trigger, anchored to a distinctive UI feature. Its only weakness is that the 'what' is expressed as a single high-level action rather than the concrete sub-steps the skill performs.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('user feedback attached to the current session') and one concrete action ('Act on user feedback'), but does not enumerate the sub-actions (retrieve, act, resolve/delete) — matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than the multi-action anchor 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Act on user feedback attached to the current session') and when ('Use when the user submits feedback on the session's changes via the Submit Feedback button') with a concrete trigger phrase, matching the 'both what AND when with concrete trigger phrases' anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'feedback', 'Submit Feedback button', and "session's changes" are natural trigger phrases a user would say, but common synonyms like 'review my changes' or 'comments on my code' are absent, fitting 'good coverage, a few natural terms missing'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tied to a specific Submit Feedback button feature with a narrow, explicit trigger, giving it a clear niche with minimal overlap risk against other skills — matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
posit-dev/positron
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.