CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

git-safe-ops

Encodes safe git operation rules — no force-push to main, always branch, always review before merge.

64

Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/git-safe-ops/SKILL.md
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.

The body is an exemplary instruction-only skill: concrete commands with exact flags, explicit escalation and failure-handling feedback loops for destructive operations, and clean section organization. The only minor weaknesses are slightly abstract Inputs/Outputs sections and an implied rather than explicit step ordering.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is a lean rule set with zero re-explanation of git concepts Claude already knows, and every rule carries concrete flags. The 'Inputs' and 'Outputs' sections are somewhat abstract and could be trimmed, which keeps it below the 'every token earns its place' anchor of 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

The guidance is copy-paste-ready throughout: 'git push --force', '--force-with-lease', 'git diff main', 'git diff --staged', 'git clean -fdx', 'git reset --hard', 'git tag -a vX.Y.Z', and 'git log --oneline origin/branch..HEAD' cover the common cases with exact commands and flags.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Validation is present and explicit for destructive operations: an escalation checklist ('Stop and confirm with the user if...'), review gates ('git diff main', 'git diff --staged'), and a Failure Modes section with feedback loops (surface hook output, never auto-resolve conflicts, present diverged history). It falls short of 5 only because the operating sequence is implied by rule ordering rather than presented as an explicit ordered workflow.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A compact (~63-line) self-contained skill with well-organized sections, no monolithic content that belongs in separate files, and clearly signaled one-level-deep references (external URLs in a References section). Per the simple-skill guidance, well-organized sections suffice here.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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.

The description is specific, in third person, and names concrete safety rules, giving it solid specificity and distinctiveness. Its main weakness is the complete absence of a 'when to use' trigger clause, which caps completeness and limits natural trigger-term coverage.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when running git commands, pushing, merging, rebasing, or creating branches in any repository.'

Broaden natural trigger terms to include 'commit', 'pull request', 'rebase', and 'push' so users' common phrasings match.

Consider naming one or two more enforced rules (e.g., credential checks before commit) to push specificity toward comprehensive coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists three concrete actions — 'no force-push to main', 'always branch', 'always review before merge' — matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor. It is not a 5 because it omits other enforced rules (credential hygiene, bulk deletes, tagging), and not a 3 because it names more than 1-2 concrete actions.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear and concrete (encodes safe git operation rules), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not a 2 because the 'what' is specific rather than vague.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms like 'git', 'force-push', 'main', 'branch', and 'merge' are words users would actually say. A few common variations are missing ('commit', 'push', 'PR', 'rebase'), which keeps it below the comprehensive-synonyms anchor of 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves out a distinct niche (git safety policy) with specific triggers like 'force-push to main'. Minor overlap risk remains with general git or commit-message skills since any git session could match 'branch' or 'merge'.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
pvnkmnk/AgenticSelfHostSkills
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.