github-author-context

GitHub contributor context: identity, activity, trust, company/team signal.

Quality

69%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/github-author-context/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

90%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body is a tight, highly actionable runbook with concrete commands and a defined output format. Its main gap is the absence of an explicit verification step before publishing the author-context block.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and command-dense, assumes Claude's competence (no explanation of what a PR or GitHub is), and every section earns its place with actionable guardrails rather than padding.	5 / 5
Actionability	It provides copy-paste-ready `gh`, `git`, `rg`, and `clawtributors` commands with concrete arguments, plus a fixed output format and sample note summaries covering the common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear Source Order (1-4) sequences context gathering with explicit fallback conditions, but there is no explicit validation/verification checkpoint before emitting the output block.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized into clearly headed sections (Inputs, Source Order, Output, Contributor Notes) and is appropriately self-contained with no external files, though it is a single monolithic file rather than split across references.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

48%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 a distinct niche and lists informative facets, but it reads as a noun phrase rather than an action statement and omits any 'when to use' trigger guidance. Adding an action verb and a 'Use when...' clause would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Lead with a concrete action verb, e.g. "Build a compact maintainer-facing profile for a GitHub PR author or contributor."

Append an explicit trigger clause: "Use during PR review when you need author identity, activity, trust, or company/team signal."

Include natural synonyms users say ("PR author", "contributor profile") alongside "GitHub contributor context".

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and lists facets ("identity, activity, trust, company/team signal") but contains no action verbs, offering fewer concrete actions than anchor 3's "1-2 concrete actions" requirement.	2 / 5
Completeness	A clear-ish 'what' is conveyed via the topic and enumerated facets, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant keywords like "GitHub", "contributor", and "context" appear, but common natural variations a maintainer would say ("PR author", "profile", "review author") are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"GitHub contributor context" carves a clear niche with distinct triggers, with only minor overlap risk against general PR-review skills.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: steipete/agent-scripts
Path: skills/github-author-context/SKILL.md
Commit: 92442a1

Reviewed: 4 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.