CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

commit

Create git commits for changes made during the session.

Quality

70%

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 ./.claude/skills/commit/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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 a well-structured, actionable workflow with concrete commands, a confirmation gate, and validation steps. Its main weaknesses are mild filler and an underspecified failure path for pre-commit hook issues.

Suggestions

Remove the redundant opening line and the motivational Remember-section filler ("The user trusts your judgment - they asked you to commit") to tighten token usage.

Replace "If rules like pre-commit are missing, solve them" with a concrete fallback, e.g., an explicit fix-and-re-run loop: "If pre-commit fails, fix the reported issues and re-run `pre-commit run --all-files` before committing."

Drop or compress the "Remember" section, since the full-context and atomic-commit points are already covered in the Process section.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient command-driven guidance, but includes unnecessary lines such as "You are tasked with creating git commits..." (restating the description) and Remember-section filler like "The user trusts your judgment - they asked you to commit". It is tighter than the verbose score-2 anchor but could clearly be tightened further.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable commands appear throughout ("git status", "git diff", "pre-commit run --all-files", "git add with specific files", "git log --oneline -n [number]") plus an exact confirmation prompt. It falls short of a 5 because "If rules like pre-commit are missing, solve them" is vague direction rather than an executable step.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-step sequence is present with an explicit user-confirmation checkpoint before execution, a pre-commit validation step, and a result-verification step (git log). It is not a 5 because there is no explicit fix-and-retry loop if pre-commit hooks fail, only the vague instruction to 'solve them'.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, needs no external references, and is organized into clear Process / Important / Remember sections. Per the simple-skill guideline, this earns the top score with well-organized sections alone.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 concise and states a clear, distinct capability, but it reads as only a partial description. It is missing the 'when to use' trigger guidance entirely and offers minimal action coverage beyond the single core action.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g., "Use when the user asks to commit, save, or check in their changes."

Enumerate the concrete actions the skill performs, such as drafting commit messages, grouping changes into logical commits, and running pre-commit hooks.

Include natural user phrasings like "commit my changes", "make a commit", or "write a commit message" to broaden trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Create git commits" names the domain and one concrete action, matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage. It is more concrete than the score-2 anchor ('Processes PDF files') but lacks the multiple specific actions needed for a 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

The description gives a clear 'what' ("Create git commits for changes made during the session") but contains no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. The 'when' is only weakly implied by 'during the session'.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"git commits" and "changes" are natural terms users would say, but common variations like "commit message", "stage", or "save my changes" are missing. This matches the anchor for some relevant keywords with missing synonyms rather than the good coverage of a 4.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Git commit creation is a mostly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against closely related git skills (e.g., PR creation or code review). It lacks the explicit distinct trigger phrases that would justify a 5.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

pymc-labs/pymc-marketing

Path

.claude/skills/commit/SKILL.md

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.