maintainer-orchestrator

Open-source maintainer orchestration: Codex app workers, work recovery, dependencies, vision, releases.

Quality

63%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/maintainer-orchestrator/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%

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 highly actionable, well-sequenced control-plane policy with explicit validation checkpoints and concrete commands throughout. Its main weaknesses are cross-section repetition and a monolithic structure that underuses progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence (no basic-concept padding), but the same rules are restated across many sections — e.g. the one-project-thread-per-repo rule appears in Worker Boundary, OpenClaw, Operating Model, Control-Plane Ownership, and Thread Naming — so it could be tightened to earn a 3.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides concrete commands (git status -sb, git pull --ff-only, op run/inject), exact file paths, numeric thresholds (30 threads, 5-minute heartbeat, 30-day revalidation), and explicit classification/title formats, giving fully executable, specific guidance.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Multi-step processes (Session Startup, Repository Synchronization, Release Gate/Execution, Monitoring Protocol) are explicitly numbered with validation checkpoints and feedback loops ('If errors: fix and re-validate', 'Only when valid', 'Abort if any gate changes'), plus checklists for decision briefs and release proposals.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The single reference (references/non-majority-repositories.md) is clearly signaled and one level deep, but the ~410-line body is largely a monolithic wall with several detailed sections (OpenClaw, Release Execution, Public Model Identifier Gate, Credential Access) that could be split into reference files rather than kept inline.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 a terse, information-dense topic list that clearly names its domain but omits concrete actions and any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance. It is adequate but not exemplary on any dimension.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause naming the situations that should trigger this skill, e.g. 'Use when coordinating open-source repository maintenance across many repos, recovering in-progress work, sweeping dependencies, or preparing releases.'

Convert the noun-list into concrete verbs/actions (e.g. 'Coordinates Codex app worker threads, recovers abandoned work, sweeps dependencies, aligns work to the project vision, and gates releases') to lift specificity from 2 to 3.

Soften the technical jargon ('Codex app workers', 'orchestration') with at least one plain natural phrasing users would actually say, to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names a clear domain ('Open-source maintainer orchestration') and lists concrete facets ('Codex app workers, work recovery, dependencies, vision, releases'), but these are noun topics rather than concrete actions, so it falls short of the multiple-specific-actions anchor at 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill does but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance; per the judging guidelines, a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes some natural user-facing terms ('open-source maintainer', 'dependencies', 'releases', 'vision') but leans on technical jargon ('Codex app workers', 'orchestration') and misses common phrasings a user would naturally say, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The maintainer-orchestration niche is fairly specific, but without explicit triggers and given overlap with related maintainer/triage skills, it could still collide with similar skills, matching the 'somewhat specific but could still overlap' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 2 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: steipete/agent-scripts
Path: skills/maintainer-orchestrator/SKILL.md
Commit: bb36883

Reviewed: about 13 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.