agent-project-board-sync
Agent skill for project-board-sync - invoke with $agent-project-board-sync
35
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
4.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-project-board-sync/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an extremely weak description that provides virtually no useful information for skill selection. It only names the skill and its invocation command without describing any capabilities, use cases, or trigger conditions. It fails on every dimension of the rubric.
Suggestions
Describe the concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Synchronizes tasks between project boards and issue trackers, updates card statuses, and maps columns across platforms.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user needs to sync project boards, update Kanban cards, or keep Trello/Jira/GitHub Projects in sync.'
Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-project-board-sync') from the description and replace it with functional details that help Claude decide when to select this skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for project-board-sync' is entirely vague and does not describe what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. The description only states it's an 'agent skill' and how to invoke it, providing no functional or contextual information. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only potentially relevant term is 'project-board-sync' which is a technical/internal identifier, not a natural keyword a user would say. No natural language trigger terms like 'project board', 'sync tasks', 'kanban', etc. are present. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague that it's impossible to distinguish it from other skills. 'Project-board-sync' hints at a domain but without any specifics, it could overlap with any project management or synchronization skill. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an extremely verbose feature catalog for what appears to be a largely fictional CLI tool (ruv-swarm). It contains no real executable workflows, no validation steps, and dumps hundreds of lines of speculative commands into a single monolithic document. The content would need to be fundamentally restructured around real, working commands with clear sequential workflows.
Suggestions
Replace fictional 'npx ruv-swarm github ...' commands with real, executable gh CLI commands and scripts that actually accomplish the described tasks
Reduce content to under 100 lines focusing on the core workflow: initialize project board, sync tasks, track progress - with explicit validation steps between each phase
Split advanced features (analytics, dashboards, cross-org sync, sprint management) into separate referenced files rather than including everything inline
Add a clear sequential workflow with numbered steps and validation checkpoints, especially for the initial board setup and sync operations
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at 400+ lines, with massive amounts of speculative CLI commands for a tool (ruv-swarm) that appears hypothetical. Includes extensive configuration examples for dashboards, KPIs, team metrics, standup automation, and many other features that pad the content enormously. Most sections explain concepts Claude already understands (agile, kanban, sprint management). | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Nearly all commands reference 'npx ruv-swarm github ...' subcommands that appear to be fictional/aspirational rather than real executable commands. The CLI flags and JSON arguments look invented. The few real gh CLI commands are buried among non-executable examples, and the overall guidance is not copy-paste ready for any real workflow. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No clear sequential workflow with validation checkpoints. The content is organized as a feature catalog rather than a step-by-step process. There are no feedback loops, no error recovery steps, and no validation between steps. For operations involving board sync (potentially destructive/batch), this is a significant gap. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of content with no meaningful separation into referenced files. Everything from board initialization to KPI tracking to troubleshooting is dumped into a single massive document. The two references at the bottom (swarm-issue.md, multi-repo-swarm.md) are insufficient given the volume of content that should be split out. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (514 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- ruvnet/claude-flow
- Commit
0d9f9b1
- 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.