agent-project-board-sync

Agent skill for project-board-sync - invoke with $agent-project-board-sync

4.00x

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

4.00x

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-project-board-sync/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 is an extremely weak description that provides virtually no useful information for skill selection. It reads as a placeholder or auto-generated stub, containing only the skill's internal name and invocation command. It fails on every dimension by not describing capabilities, triggers, use cases, or distinguishing characteristics.

Suggestions

Describe the concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Synchronizes tasks between a local project board and an external tracker such as Jira, Trello, or GitHub Projects.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to sync project boards, update task status across tools, or mentions Jira/Trello/GitHub Projects synchronization.'

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

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), with most commands being unverifiable and likely non-functional. The content lacks any clear workflow, validation steps, or progressive disclosure, instead dumping hundreds of lines of configuration examples and CLI invocations that Claude cannot meaningfully execute. The few legitimate gh CLI commands are lost among fabricated ones, and path variables use incorrect syntax ($ instead of /).

Suggestions

Replace fictional 'npx ruv-swarm github ...' commands with actual gh CLI commands and MCP tool calls that Claude can execute, or clearly document how to install and verify ruv-swarm exists

Reduce content to under 100 lines focusing on a single clear workflow: initialize board sync → map tasks → validate sync → monitor, with explicit validation checkpoints

Fix broken path syntax throughout (e.g., '$dev$null' should be '/dev/null', '$GITHUB_REPOSITORY$issues' should use proper variable interpolation)

Split detailed configuration examples (YAML mapping, dashboard JSON, view configs) into separate referenced files, keeping only a minimal quick-start example in the main skill

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose at ~400+ lines covering dozens of features, most of which are CLI commands for a tool (ruv-swarm) that Claude cannot verify exist or work. Massive amounts of configuration examples, dashboard JSON, and YAML that pad the content without adding actionable value. Many sections (Best Practices, Team Collaboration, Metrics & KPIs) are generic project management advice Claude already knows.	1 / 3
Actionability	Nearly all commands reference 'npx ruv-swarm github ...' subcommands that appear fabricated or unverifiable - these are not standard tools. The commands look like pseudocode dressed as CLI invocations. The few real gh CLI commands are buried among fictional ones, and the bash scripts have syntax issues (e.g., '$dev$null', '$GITHUB_REPOSITORY$issues').	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	No clear sequential workflow with validation checkpoints. The content is organized as a feature catalog rather than a process to follow. There are no feedback loops, no error recovery steps in the main workflows, and no validation between steps. The troubleshooting section just lists more fictional CLI commands rather than actual diagnostic steps.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Monolithic wall of content with no meaningful separation into referenced files. Everything is dumped into one massive document. The final 'See also' links reference other files but the current document itself should have been split into overview + detailed references. The sheer volume of inline configuration examples and code blocks makes navigation difficult.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 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 (514 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: ruvnet/ruflo
Commit: 398f7c2

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.