CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

github-project-management

Comprehensive GitHub project management with swarm-coordinated issue tracking, project board automation, and sprint planning

69

1.51x
Quality

55%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.51x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/github-project-management/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%

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 broad, command-heavy catalog with concrete snippets and some sequencing, but it is over-long, leans on unverified ruv-swarm subcommands, and lacks validation checkpoints for destructive/batch workflows. It would benefit from splitting into referenced files, trimming to verified commands, and adding validation steps.

Suggestions

Move templates, advanced coordination, and metrics sections into separate referenced files (e.g. TEMPLATES.md, ADVANCED.md) to reduce the monolithic body and improve progressive disclosure.

Add explicit validation/checkpoint steps to destructive and batch workflows (e.g. confirm counts before closing stale issues, dry-run before bulk card operations).

Verify or caveat the 'npx ruv-swarm github <subcommand>' calls, keeping only confirmed-executable commands copy-paste ready and marking speculative ones as illustrative.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~1240-line body is mostly concrete commands rather than concept explanations Claude already knows, but it is a sprawling catalog that could be heavily tightened; it does not earn the lean 'every token earns its place' anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

It provides many concrete bash/gh snippets, but the bulk of guidance relies on speculative 'npx ruv-swarm github <subcommand>' invocations whose executability is unverified, leaving it short of fully copy-paste-ready, confirmed-executable code.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A numbered 'Complete Workflow Example' and 'Quick Start' provide sequencing, but destructive and batch operations (e.g. auto-closing stale issues, bulk card ops, close-duplicates) lack validation checkpoints, which the rubric caps at 2.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Collapsible <details> sections give some structure, but the file is a monolithic ~1240-line catalog with no bundle files and content (templates, advanced coordination, metrics) that should be split remaining inline, so it does not meet the clear-overview-with-one-level-references anchor.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Description

60%

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 and names concrete capabilities, but it omits explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance and leans on 'swarm-coordinated' jargon. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms would raise both completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause naming natural trigger phrases (e.g. 'Use when managing GitHub issues, project boards, sprints, or backlog triage').

Replace or de-emphasize 'swarm-coordinated' with user-natural terms like 'automated' or 'agent-coordinated' to improve trigger term quality.

Tighten distinctiveness by naming the specific GitHub surface (issues, projects/v2 boards, milestones) that separates this from github-pr-workflow and github-release-management.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete capabilities — 'swarm-coordinated issue tracking', 'project board automation', and 'sprint planning' — matching the anchor for naming several specific actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does but lacks any 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which the rubric caps at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural terms like 'GitHub project management', 'issue tracking', 'project board', and 'sprint planning', but 'swarm-coordinated' is jargon users would not naturally say, leaving some common variations uncovered.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The GitHub project/boards/sprints niche is fairly specific, but it could still overlap with related skills such as github-pr-workflow and github-release-management rather than having a clearly conflict-free trigger set.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (1278 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
ruvnet/agentic-flow
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.