CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

openclaw-release-maintainer

Maintainer workflow for OpenClaw releases, prereleases, changelog release notes, and publish validation. Use when Codex needs to prepare or verify stable or beta release steps, align version naming, assemble release notes, check release auth requirements, or validate publish-time commands and artifacts.

66

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

68%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 concise, actionable, and well-structured with concrete commands, paths, and tag formats, all of it non-obvious maintainer knowledge. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: validation is present but lacks an error-recovery feedback loop and an end-to-end sequenced checklist.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop after the publish-time validation commands (e.g., 'If any check fails, fix the issue and re-run all three before proceeding to tag/publish').

Provide a single end-to-end numbered release checklist (bump versions → tag → publish → validate → attach artifacts) so the topic-organized sections map to a clear sequence.

Replace the pathless 'private maintainer release docs' references with a concrete location or note that the runbook is intentionally out-of-repo, so the navigation gap is explicit rather than ambiguous.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — every section is non-obvious maintainer knowledge (private doc paths, version locations, beta-tag conventions) with no over-explanation of known concepts — but minor trims are possible (the closing GHSA section restates the opener's boundary), fitting anchor 4 rather than a flawless anchor 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Copy-paste commands ('node --import tsx scripts/release-check.ts', 'pnpm release:check', 'pnpm test:install:smoke'), concrete file paths, and exact tag/dist-tag formats are present and executable, but the core runbook is deferred to private external docs ('private maintainer release docs for the actual runbook'), leaving minor gaps per anchor 4.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A validation checkpoint exists ('Before tagging or publishing, run...') and the mac-beta cut is a concrete sub-sequence, but there is no validate→fix→retry feedback loop and the overall flow is topic-organized rather than a single sequenced checklist; per the scoring note, missing feedback loops in destructive/batch publish contexts caps this at 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Single-file skill with clear section headers and one-level repo-doc references signaled by path (docs/reference/RELEASING.md, CHANGELOG.md), with minor gaps — references to 'private maintainer docs' carry no path and inlined policy detail (version locations, channel naming) could be split out — matching anchor 4.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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, complete, and highly distinct, clearly answering both what the skill does and when to use it with concrete trigger phrases. The only soft spot is trigger-term coverage, which is strong but lacks a few natural synonyms a maintainer might say.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists five concrete actions — 'prepare or verify stable or beta release steps', 'align version naming', 'assemble release notes', 'check release auth requirements', 'validate publish-time commands and artifacts' — giving comprehensive coverage of the release-maintainer niche, matching the anchor-5 example rather than the anchor-4 'minor gaps' level.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly states the 'what' ('Maintainer workflow for OpenClaw releases, prereleases, changelog release notes, and publish validation') and a concrete 'Use when Codex needs to...' clause with multiple trigger phrases, matching anchor 5's 'clearly and explicitly answers both what AND when'.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural maintainer terms are present ('releases', 'prereleases', 'beta', 'publish', 'changelog release notes', 'release notes'), but common synonyms a maintainer would say — 'tag', 'ship', 'npm publish', 'dist-tag' — are absent, fitting anchor 4's 'good coverage; a few natural terms missing'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to a named project's release maintainer workflow with explicit boundary guidance (GHSA work deferred to a separate skill), yielding a clear niche with minimal conflict risk per anchor 5.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
qsimeon/openclaw-engaging
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.