CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

resolving-merge-conflicts

Use when you need to resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase conflict.

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is resolving-merge-conflicts in YoizenSA/dev-ai-workflow

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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.

An exemplary lean, well-sequenced workflow with a genuine validation-and-fix loop — the main weakness is the near-total absence of executable git commands, which leaves the agent to reconstruct them from memory. The closing steps are also underspecified relative to the rest.

Suggestions

Inline the key commands per step: `git status` / `git log --merge --patch` for inspection, `git add` + `git commit` to finish a merge, `git rebase --continue` for rebases.

Add a pre-finish validation check that no conflict markers (`<<<<<<<`) remain in staged files before committing.

Make the finish step concrete about rebases: repeat `git rebase --continue` until all commits are rebased rather than describing it abstractly.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Fourteen lean lines with zero padding; phrases like "Understand deeply why each change was made" and "Do **not** invent new behaviour" assume Claude's competence and only state what it wouldn't already know. Every token earns its place — matches the anchor-5 example.

5 / 5

Actionability

Steps are directionally concrete ("Check git history", "run them, typically typecheck, then tests, then format") but contain no executable commands — no `git status`, `git log --merge`, `git add`, or `git rebase --continue`. This matches anchor 3 ('concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details') rather than 4, which requires concrete code or commands.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint (step 4: run automated checks and "Fix anything the merge broke" — a fix-and-retry feedback loop). Not 5: there is no check for leftover conflict markers before committing, and "continue the rebase process" is stated abstractly without the command.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple, single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no bundle files and no content that belongs in separate reference files; the numbered, bold-headed sections are well-organized and easy to navigate, so the simple-skill provision applies.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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.

A tight, trigger-first description with natural keywords and a clearly bounded niche. Its main limitations are single-action coverage and a 'when' clause that mirrors the 'what' instead of adding distinct trigger phrases.

Suggestions

Add concrete trigger phrases to the 'when' clause, e.g. 'Use when the user mentions a merge conflict, conflicting files, or a stuck rebase/cherry-pick'.

Name one or two more specific actions (e.g. 'resolves hunk-level conflicts preserving both intents, then runs typecheck/tests to verify') to raise specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase conflict" names the domain and one concrete action, but lists no further specific actions — matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor rather than the 'several specific actions' of 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

It has both a clear what ("resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase conflict") and an explicit when ("Use when you need to resolve..."). Not 5: the when clause simply restates the what rather than adding separate concrete trigger phrases; not 3 because 'when' is explicitly present.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"git", "merge", "rebase", "conflict", "resolve" are all natural phrases a user would say when they need this skill. Not 5: common variations like "fix conflicts", "conflicting files", or related commands ("cherry-pick") are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The merge/rebase conflict niche is distinct from general git skills, and 'in-progress' further narrows it. Minor overlap risk remains with general git-commit or code-review skills, so not 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

tonykay/transcriber

Path

.agents/skills/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md

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.