CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

reproduce-bug

Systematically reproduce and investigate a bug from a GitHub issue. Use when the user provides a GitHub issue number or URL for a bug they want reproduced or investigated.

67

Quality

81%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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 well-structured, executable workflow with strong sequencing and explicit validation/feedback loops, plus a confirmation gate before external actions. The main weaknesses are minor over-explanation and a few prose-only steps that lack concrete code.

Suggestions

Tighten rationale sentences (e.g., 'This focuses the investigation and prevents aimless exploration', 'before touching the codebase') to raise conciseness toward lean efficiency.

Add a minimal failing-test code template and a concrete manual-reproduction step format so Route A and Route C are as copy-paste-ready as the browser route.

Move the `agent-browser` CLI command reference and the issue-comment report template into a references/ file, keeping SKILL.md as a tighter overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient and assumes Claude's competence without explaining basic concepts, but retains minor rationale padding like 'This focuses the investigation and prevents aimless exploration' and 'before touching the codebase', fitting the 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' anchor rather than the lean level 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete executable commands throughout (`gh issue view`, `agent-browser` CLI, `git log`, a ready `gh issue comment` heredoc), but Route A's test-writing and Route C's manual steps remain prose without code templates, matching 'mostly executable; minor gaps' rather than fully copy-paste-ready level 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced five-phase workflow with explicit validation checkpoints (server verification, failing-test confirmation, the 'If reproduction fails' recovery loop) and an external-action confirmation gate, matching the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps and feedback loops' anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well organized into phases and routes with a clearly signaled one-level reference to the `agent-browser` skill, but the ~188-line body keeps some detail (browser CLI usage, report templates) inline that could be split out, fitting 'good structure; references mostly clear; minor organization gaps' rather than the ideal split of level 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

82%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 is strong: it states concrete actions and a domain, provides an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, and occupies a distinct niche with low conflict risk. Its only weakness is specificity, where two actions fall short of comprehensive coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('bug from a GitHub issue') and two concrete actions ('reproduce and investigate') but does not enumerate a comprehensive set of capabilities, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor rather than the multiple-action level above.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Systematically reproduce and investigate a bug from a GitHub issue') and when ('Use when the user provides a GitHub issue number or URL for a bug they want reproduced or investigated') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ('GitHub issue', 'issue number or URL', 'reproduce', 'investigated') with good coverage, though a few common synonyms like 'debug' or 'triage' are absent, fitting the 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' anchor rather than comprehensive level 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Carves a clear niche (reproducing bugs from GitHub issues) with specific, distinct triggers tied to issue numbers/URLs, yielding minimal overlap with other skills per the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
udecode/plate
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.