agent-workflow-automation
Agent skill for workflow-automation - invoke with $agent-workflow-automation
36
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
95%
6.33xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-workflow-automation/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 description is essentially a placeholder that restates the skill name without providing any meaningful information about capabilities, use cases, or trigger conditions. It fails on every dimension: no concrete actions, no natural trigger terms, no completeness, and no distinctiveness. Claude would have no basis for selecting this skill appropriately from a list of available skills.
Suggestions
Replace the generic label with specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Automates multi-step workflows by chaining API calls, scheduling tasks, and managing conditional logic.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to automate a sequence of steps, create a pipeline, schedule recurring tasks, or chain multiple actions together.'
Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-workflow-automation') from the description—it wastes space and doesn't help Claude decide when to select the skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Workflow-automation' is abstract and vague—it doesn't describe what specific tasks or operations the skill performs. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. There is no 'Use when...' clause and no description of capabilities beyond the skill name itself. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only keyword is 'workflow-automation,' which is generic jargon. There are no natural terms a user would say, such as specific workflow types, automation targets, or task names. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Workflow-automation' is extremely generic and could overlap with virtually any skill that automates tasks, processes, or pipelines. There are no distinct triggers to differentiate it. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
7%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 collection of fictional/aspirational code examples that reference non-existent tools and libraries. None of the code is executable, and the document lacks any coherent workflow with validation steps. It reads more like a marketing document for a hypothetical product than an actionable skill that Claude could use to automate GitHub Actions workflows.
Suggestions
Replace all fictional 'ruv-swarm' and made-up MCP tool invocations with real, executable commands using the actual tools listed in the frontmatter (gh CLI, actual GitHub Actions syntax, real MCP tool calls with correct syntax).
Reduce the document to under 100 lines by removing redundant sections and keeping only the core workflow: analyze repo → generate workflow YAML → validate → deploy → monitor.
Add a clear sequential workflow with explicit validation checkpoints, e.g., 'Validate generated YAML with actionlint before committing' and error recovery steps.
Move the extensive template examples into separate referenced files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with one or two concrete examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at 400+ lines with massive amounts of repetitive content. Many sections show variations of the same pattern (spawn agents, run npx commands). Explains concepts Claude already knows, and includes speculative/aspirational features (predictive failures, self-healing CI) with no real executable substance. The document could be reduced by 70%+ without losing actionable information. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite abundant code blocks, nearly all examples reference a fictional tool 'ruv-swarm' and fictional MCP tool invocations with made-up syntax (e.g., mcp__claude-flow__swarm_init with JSON-like arguments that aren't valid in any real format). None of the code is executable or copy-paste ready. The YAML workflows reference non-existent GitHub Actions (ruvnet/swarm-action@v1). This is essentially pseudocode dressed up as real commands. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No clear sequential workflow with validation checkpoints exists. The document presents a scattered collection of disconnected code snippets and feature descriptions without a coherent process for actually automating workflows. There are no verification steps, no error recovery loops, and no clear ordering of operations. The 'Self-Healing CI/CD' section ironically lacks any actual healing logic. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The document has section headers and ends with references to related files (swarm-pr.md, swarm-issue.md, sync-coordinator.md), which is good. However, the main content is a monolithic wall of code blocks that should be split into separate reference files. The overview section is minimal while the inline content is overwhelming. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 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 (640 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- ruvnet/claude-flow
- Commit
f547cec
- 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.