CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

github-project-management

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

69

1.51x
Quality

55%

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

35%

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

The skill is action-dense but far too long, padded with repetitive and partly non-executable command examples, and monolithically inline with no progressive disclosure. Destructive and batch workflows also lack validation checkpoints. It needs aggressive trimming, real executable examples, file-based reference splitting, and explicit validation steps.

Suggestions

Cut the body drastically: consolidate the repetitive `ruv-swarm github` subcommand blocks into a single command reference and remove sections that restate general knowledge (Best Practices, Metrics & Analytics, Security & Permissions).

Verify every command is executable; replace the pseudocode `mcp__claude-flow__*` JavaScript with valid, runnable invocations or remove them.

Add explicit validate->fix->retry checkpoints to the destructive/batch workflows (stale-issue closing, bulk board operations) and move large reference material into separate one-level-deep files linked from the overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~1240-line body is padded with repetitive near-duplicate `npx ruv-swarm github <subcommand>` blocks and prose sections (Best Practices, Metrics, Security) that largely restate what Claude already knows, fitting the verbose/padded anchor.

1 / 3

Actionability

Real `gh` CLI commands are concrete and copy-paste ready, but the `mcp__claude-flow__*` JavaScript blocks are pseudocode and many `ruv-swarm github` subcommands appear non-executable, leaving guidance incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Sequenced workflows exist (e.g. the numbered Complete Workflow Example), but destructive/batch operations like stale-issue auto-close and bulk board ops lack validate-then-proceed feedback loops, capping this at 2.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Collapsible <details> sections provide some structure, but with no bundle files the entire 1240-line reference is inline rather than split into one-level-deep reference files, which is poor for a skill this large.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 is concrete and uses natural trigger terms, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' guidance and leads with a broad 'Comprehensive' framing that risks overlapping with sibling GitHub skills. Adding a trigger clause and narrowing the opening would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to manage GitHub issues, project boards, sprints, or swarm-coordinated task tracking.'

Drop or narrow the leading 'Comprehensive' buzzword to reduce over-claim and conflict risk with related GitHub skills.

Mirror the natural phrasing users say (e.g. 'GitHub Projects', 'project board', 'sprint planning') in the trigger clause to strengthen distinctiveness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete capabilities — 'swarm-coordinated issue tracking, project board automation, and sprint planning' — rather than vague abstractions, matching the multiple-specific-actions anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly states what the skill does but provides no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 2 per the rubric guidelines.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Uses natural phrasing a user would say ('GitHub project management', 'issue tracking', 'project board', 'sprint planning') with good coverage of common variations.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The phrase 'Comprehensive GitHub project management' is broad enough to overlap with the related github-pr-workflow and github-release-management skills, despite the swarm/board/sprint niche.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 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

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
ruvnet/ruvector
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.