CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

github-project-management

Comprehensive GitHub project management with swarm-coordinated issue tracking, project board automation, and sprint planning

51

1.51x
Quality

26%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.51x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/github-project-management/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is github-project-management in ruvnet/agentic-flow

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

20%

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, largely aspirational document that describes a comprehensive GitHub project management system built around a seemingly fictional 'ruv-swarm' CLI tool. The vast majority of commands are not executable, making the skill more of a product specification than actionable guidance. While it demonstrates good structural ideas (collapsible sections, a complete workflow example), the sheer volume of speculative content and lack of real, executable instructions severely undermines its utility as a skill file.

Suggestions

Remove or drastically reduce all 'npx ruv-swarm' commands unless the tool actually exists and is installable — replace with real gh CLI commands, GitHub Actions workflows, or MCP tool calls that Claude can actually execute.

Reduce the skill to under 150 lines focusing on the core actionable workflows: issue creation with gh CLI, project board management with gh project commands, and a single end-to-end workflow example with validation steps.

Move templates (bug report, feature request, integration issue) into separate bundle files and reference them from the main SKILL.md.

Add explicit validation checkpoints to batch operations (e.g., 'verify issue count before bulk close', 'dry-run sync before bidirectional update') to prevent destructive mistakes.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at 700+ lines. Massive amounts of speculative CLI commands for a tool (ruv-swarm) that appears to be hypothetical. Includes extensive templates, dashboard JSON configs, and repetitive patterns that bloat the content enormously. Many sections explain obvious concepts (what a bug report template looks like, what KPIs are). The skill could be reduced to 20% of its size without losing actionable information.

1 / 3

Actionability

Nearly all commands reference 'npx ruv-swarm github ...' which appears to be a fictional/unreleased tool with invented CLI flags. The commands are not executable or verifiable. The JavaScript blocks use pseudo-syntax for MCP calls (e.g., 'mcp__claude-flow__swarm_init { topology: "star" }') that isn't valid code. The gh CLI commands are real but represent a small fraction of the content. Most of this is aspirational rather than actionable.

1 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 'Complete Workflow Example' section at the end provides a numbered sequence (create issue → init swarm → add to board → sync → monitor), which shows some workflow structure. However, there are no validation checkpoints, no error handling steps, and no feedback loops for the many destructive/batch operations described (bulk close stale issues, cross-org sync, data recovery). The individual sections are disconnected feature showcases rather than coherent workflows.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Uses HTML <details> tags to collapse sections, which is a reasonable progressive disclosure technique. However, there are no bundle files to reference, and the skill itself is monolithic — all content is inline in one massive file. The references to external resources at the bottom are external URLs, not structured bundle files. The issue templates and workflow configs could easily be separate files.

2 / 3

Total

6

/

12

Passed

Description

32%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description identifies the domain (GitHub project management) and lists several capability areas but remains at a high level without concrete actions. It critically lacks a 'Use when...' clause, making it harder for Claude to know when to select this skill. The term 'swarm-coordinated' is internal jargon that adds no value for skill selection.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about GitHub issues, project boards, sprint planning, milestones, or backlog management.'

Replace vague category names with specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Creates and assigns GitHub issues, moves project board cards between columns, sets up sprint milestones, and generates burndown reports.'

Remove or clarify internal jargon like 'swarm-coordinated' which users would never say and replace with user-facing terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (GitHub project management) and some actions (issue tracking, project board automation, sprint planning), but these are somewhat high-level categories rather than concrete specific actions like 'create issues', 'assign labels', 'move cards between columns', etc.

2 / 3

Completeness

Describes what the skill does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and since the 'what' is also somewhat vague, this scores a 1.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords like 'GitHub', 'issue tracking', 'project board', and 'sprint planning' that users might say, but 'swarm-coordinated' is internal jargon unlikely to be used by users. Missing common variations like 'milestones', 'kanban', 'backlog', 'tickets'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The GitHub focus and mention of project boards and sprint planning provide some specificity, but 'project management' and 'issue tracking' are broad enough to overlap with generic task management or other GitHub-related skills.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation9 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (1278 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

9

/

11

Passed

Repository
ruvnet/ruv-FANN
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.