CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

positron-qa-verify

Generates clear, actionable verification guides for QA testing of Positron bug fixes and features

62

Quality

72%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/positron-qa-verify/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 content is concise, highly actionable, and well-structured with properly signaled one-level-deep references. Its only gap is the absence of explicit validation/feedback checkpoints in what is otherwise a clear multi-step batch workflow.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation checkpoints between steps, e.g. after fetching the issue verify the JSON is non-empty before analyzing, and after generating the guide confirm the output file was written before offering the comment template.

For PRs skipped due to the 500-line threshold, state the fallback explicitly (use PR description and comments) so the conditional branch is unambiguous.

Note what to do when the parallel gh issue/pr fetches return no data or fail, consistent with the fail-fast ethos, so the error path is concrete rather than implicit.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — concrete gh commands, conditional thresholds, and parallelization hints with no padding or explanation of basic concepts like what a PR or gh is. The version strings appear only as illustrative sample JSON output rather than time-sensitive directives, so they do not penalize conciseness.

3 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable gh commands with exact --json field lists, a concrete PR-size threshold (< 500 lines), exact output paths, and a runnable script, all copy-paste ready rather than pseudocode.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 7-step sequence is well-ordered with parallelization and conditional gating ('Only for PRs < 500 lines', 'Only when user accepts'), but it performs batch/automated operations with no explicit validate-then-retry feedback checkpoints, which per the scoring notes caps workflow clarity at 2.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview that defers detailed format/examples to references/verification_guide.md and version logic to scripts/detect_versions.sh — both real, one-level-deep, clearly signaled references — so content is appropriately split with easy navigation.

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 conveys a clear, distinctive niche and a concrete primary action, but stops short of listing multiple specific actions and omits an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause. These gaps leave specificity, trigger quality, and completeness at the mid level.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when assigned a QA verification ticket for a Positron bug fix or feature, or when planning manual test scenarios for a PR'.

List multiple concrete actions to lift specificity, e.g. 'extracts edge cases from issue/PR comments, generates step-by-step test scenarios, and produces verification comment templates'.

Broaden trigger terms with common user phrasings like 'manual QA', 'test plan', 'verify a fix', and 'regression check'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('Positron bug fixes and features') and a concrete action ('Generates...verification guides for QA testing'), but lists a single primary action rather than multiple distinct concrete actions, so it does not reach the score-3 anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does but provides no explicit 'when' trigger guidance, so per the judging guideline a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant natural terms ('QA testing', 'verification guides', 'bug fixes') but lacks a 'Use when...' clause and misses common phrasing variations, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor rather than full coverage.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Positron bug fixes and features' plus 'QA testing' carves out a clear, narrow niche with distinct triggers that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

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.

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.