agent-release-swarm

Agent skill for release-swarm - invoke with $agent-release-swarm

2.94x

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

2.94x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-release-swarm/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

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 description is essentially a label and invocation command with no functional content. It fails on every dimension: it doesn't describe what the skill does, when to use it, or provide any natural trigger terms. It is one of the weakest possible skill descriptions.

Suggestions

Describe what 'release-swarm' actually does with concrete actions (e.g., 'Coordinates multi-agent release workflows, manages version bumps, changelog generation, and deployment orchestration').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about releasing software, cutting a release, publishing a new version, or coordinating deployment steps').

Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-release-swarm') from the description and replace it with domain-specific keywords that help Claude distinguish this skill from others.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description provides no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for release-swarm' 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 the invocation command, providing no functional or contextual information.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The only keyword is 'release-swarm', which is a technical/internal term unlikely to be naturally used by users. There are no natural language trigger terms describing the task domain.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so vague that it's impossible to distinguish it from other agent skills. Without any domain or action specificity, it could conflict with anything or nothing.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Implementation

12%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill is excessively long and verbose, presenting a sprawling collection of CLI commands for a tool (ruv-swarm) whose existence and functionality cannot be verified. The content reads more like aspirational product documentation than actionable instructions, with repetitive patterns and sections that explain concepts Claude already understands. The lack of content organization into separate files makes this a monolithic reference that would consume significant context window for minimal actionable value.

Suggestions

Reduce content to under 100 lines by extracting configuration examples, workflow YAML, and agent details into separate referenced files (e.g., AGENTS.md, WORKFLOWS.md, CONFIG.md)

Replace or supplement the unverifiable 'npx ruv-swarm' commands with concrete, executable alternatives using standard tools (gh CLI, npm, docker) that Claude can actually run

Remove the release notes template, best practices section, and other content that explains concepts Claude already knows

Add explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery steps to the core release workflow (e.g., 'If build fails, check X before retrying')

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose at 400+ lines with massive amounts of repetitive CLI examples that all follow the same pattern (npx ruv-swarm github <command> --flags). Many sections are redundant (e.g., multiple changelog generation examples, repeated deployment configs). The release notes template and best practices sections explain things Claude already knows.	1 / 3
Actionability	Nearly all commands reference 'npx ruv-swarm github' which is a proprietary/unknown tool with no documentation on what it actually does or how to install it. The commands appear aspirational rather than executable - there's no evidence these CLI subcommands exist. The gh CLI examples are more concrete but are mixed with non-verifiable tool invocations.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The GitHub Actions workflow and some bash sequences show a reasonable step ordering, and the progressive deployment section includes validation criteria. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints or error recovery loops in most workflows - steps just proceed linearly. The relationship between the various 'agents' and when to use each is unclear.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	This is a monolithic wall of text with everything inlined. The YAML config, workflow files, release notes templates, and detailed agent descriptions should be in separate referenced files. The two references at the bottom (workflow-automation.md, multi-repo-swarm.md) are insufficient given the massive amount of content that should be split out.	1 / 3
	Total	5 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

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 (588 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: ruvnet/claude-flow
Commit: 01070ed

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.