worktree-cleanup
Removes git worktrees safely, cleans up associated branches, and pulls latest mainline after removal. Use when finished with a worktree, done with a branch, cleaning up after a merge or PR, abandoning work in a worktree, or when "git worktree list" shows stale entries. Checks for uncommitted changes, verifies no open PRs before branch deletion, and handles force-removal of locked worktrees.
90
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 excellent skill description that clearly articulates specific capabilities, provides comprehensive trigger scenarios via an explicit 'Use when...' clause, and occupies a distinct niche around git worktree cleanup. It uses proper third-person voice throughout and balances detail with conciseness effectively.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: removes worktrees, cleans up associated branches, pulls latest mainline, checks for uncommitted changes, verifies no open PRs before branch deletion, handles force-removal of locked worktrees. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (removes worktrees, cleans branches, pulls mainline, checks uncommitted changes, verifies PRs, force-removes locked worktrees) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing five distinct trigger scenarios. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'worktree', 'branch', 'cleaning up after a merge or PR', 'abandoning work', 'git worktree list', 'stale entries', 'done with a branch', 'finished with a worktree'. These are highly natural phrases a user would use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche focused specifically on git worktree removal and cleanup. The combination of worktree removal, branch cleanup, and PR verification creates a clear, unique scope unlikely to conflict with general git skills or other worktree creation skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, actionable skill with excellent workflow clarity and a well-thought-out sequence of validation checkpoints and error recovery paths. The critical CWD warning is genuinely valuable non-obvious knowledge. The main weakness is moderate redundancy — the safety constraints and commands are stated multiple times across the steps, Red Flags section, and Quick Reference table, which inflates token usage without adding new information.
Suggestions
Consolidate the 'Red Flags' section by removing items already stated inline in the steps, or remove the inline warnings and keep only the Red Flags summary to eliminate redundancy.
Consider removing the Quick Reference table since every command is already shown in context within the steps — or keep only the table and trim command blocks from the steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is mostly efficient but has some redundancy — the 'Red Flags' section largely repeats constraints already stated inline in the steps (e.g., the cd-before-removal warning appears three times). The Quick Reference table also duplicates commands already shown. However, it doesn't explain basic git concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Every step provides fully executable bash commands with specific flags and options. The commands are copy-paste ready, include fallback paths, and cover edge cases like locked worktrees, stale metadata, and dead CWD recovery. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is clearly sequenced (Steps 1-5) with explicit validation checkpoints: checking for uncommitted changes before removal, checking for open PRs before branch deletion, confirming destructive operations, and handling pull failures with feedback loops. The recovery section for dead CWD is an excellent error-recovery pattern. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's somewhat long for a single file (~120 lines of substantive content). The Quick Reference table and Red Flags sections add bulk that partially duplicates the step-by-step content. However, the Integration section nicely signals related skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%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
- shousper/claude-kit
- Commit
a01bac9
- 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.