agent-swarm-pr

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

2.62x

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

97%

2.62x

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-swarm-pr/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 fails on every dimension. It provides no information about what the skill does, when it should be used, or what problem it solves. It reads more like a stub or placeholder than a functional skill description.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions describing what swarm-pr actually does (e.g., 'Creates and manages pull requests across multiple repositories, coordinates parallel PR reviews, and tracks PR status').

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about pull requests, PR creation, code review coordination, or multi-repo PRs').

Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-swarm-pr') from the description field, as this is operational detail that doesn't help Claude decide when to select this skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for swarm-pr' 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 keyword is 'swarm-pr' which is a technical/internal name, not a natural term a user would say. There are no natural language trigger terms like 'pull request', 'PR review', 'code review', etc.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so generic ('agent skill') that it provides no distinguishing characteristics. Without knowing what it does, it could conflict with any number of other skills.	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, poorly organized document that presents a hypothetical swarm-PR management system with no executable, verifiable code. It suffers from massive redundancy (PR initialization shown 5+ different ways), references non-existent CLI tools and undefined functions as if they were real, and lacks any coherent workflow with validation steps. The content reads more like aspirational product documentation than an actionable skill for Claude.

Suggestions

Reduce content by 70-80%: eliminate redundant sections, pick ONE canonical way to initialize a PR swarm, and remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows (webhooks, GitHub Actions basics, label concepts).

Replace pseudocode and hypothetical CLI commands with actual executable code using the MCP tools listed in the frontmatter (e.g., real mcp__github__get_pull_request calls with proper parameters).

Define a single clear workflow with numbered steps, explicit validation checkpoints, and error recovery paths (e.g., 1. Get PR diff → 2. Analyze complexity → 3. Spawn agents → 4. Validate results → 5. Post review).

Split advanced content (webhook integration, multi-PR coordination, metrics) into separate referenced files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with clear navigation links.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines with massive redundancy. Multiple sections show the same concepts (PR init, swarm creation) repeated in different forms. The 'Advanced Swarm PR Coordination' section largely duplicates earlier content with MCP tool syntax. Explains obvious concepts like webhook handling and label mapping that Claude already understands. Many code blocks are speculative/non-executable examples of a tool (ruv-swarm) with unclear real-world applicability.	1 / 3
Actionability	Despite abundant code blocks, nearly all examples reference a hypothetical CLI tool (`npx ruv-swarm`) and pseudo-API calls (e.g., `mcp__claude_flow__swarm_init({ topology, maxAgents: 8 })`) that are not real executable code. The JavaScript lifecycle hooks are pseudocode calling undefined functions like `analyzePRComplexity` and `getOptimalAgents`. Nothing is copy-paste ready or verifiably executable.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	No clear sequential workflow with validation checkpoints. The content presents a scattered collection of features and commands without a coherent step-by-step process. There are no feedback loops, error recovery steps, or validation gates despite dealing with destructive operations like PR merging. The 'Integration with Claude Code' section lists 5 vague steps without any concrete implementation.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Monolithic wall of text with no meaningful content separation. References to swarm-issue.md, sync-coordinator.md, and workflow-automation.md at the bottom, but no bundle files are provided. The document dumps everything inline—webhook handlers, GitHub Actions configs, label mappings, metrics, security considerations—without any organizational hierarchy or clear navigation structure.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: ruvnet/ruflo
Commit: 844f68d

Reviewed: about 3 hours 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.