CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

gh-pr-description

Drafts and reviews GitHub pull request descriptions for the eve repository. Use when opening, updating, or reviewing a PR, or when summarizing a branch for reviewers.

Quality

84%

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

86%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.

A lean, well-structured instruction skill: every line is an executable directive, the gather→write→publish workflow is clearly sequenced with an explicit pre-publish checkpoint, and the 35-line body needs no external files. The single gap is the absence of a worked example showing what a good filled-in description looks like.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Every line is directive with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows — e.g., "Limit descriptive sentences to 25 words and procedural sentences to 20 words" and "Preserve the checklist and check only verified items" each earn their tokens. There is nothing to trim, matching the lean top anchor rather than level 4's "minor instances of over-explanation".

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: "Fill in `.github/pull_request_template.md`", "pass it to `gh pr create` or `gh pr edit` with `--body-file`", and "Link an existing issue ... with `Closes #N`". It stops short of level 5 because there is no worked example of a filled-in description, which is the common case an example would fully cover.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear gather ("Inspect the branch diff, commits, related issue...") → write → publish sequence exists with an explicit checkpoint ("Before publishing, confirm the Summary leads with why the change is needed") and a verification rule ("check only verified items"). It is below level 5 because there is no error-recovery or review feedback loop, though the operation is non-destructive so the batch/destructive cap does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external references, and is organized into clear sections (intro, Write, Publish); the only cited path (.github/pull_request_template.md) is a repo file the skill must consume, not a bundle reference. Per the rubric's simple-skill provision this matches the top anchor.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 strong description that clearly and explicitly states both capability and trigger conditions in third person with natural user phrasing. Its only real weakness is thin action coverage — two verbs where a fuller enumeration of what drafting/reviewing entails would sharpen specificity and further separate it from adjacent code-review skills.

Suggestions

Enumerate 1-2 more concrete capabilities (e.g., "fills in the pull request template, tightens summaries, verifies checklist items") to lift specificity from two generic verbs to several distinct actions.

Add common trigger variants such as "PR body" or "fill in the PR description" to reduce collision with code-review skills that also trigger on "reviewing a PR".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Drafts and reviews GitHub pull request descriptions for the eve repository" names the domain plus exactly two concrete actions (draft, review), which matches the anchor for naming a domain with 1-2 actions but not comprehensive coverage. It is above level 2 because the actions are concrete rather than generic, and below level 4 because it does not list several specific actions (e.g., restructuring a summary, tightening wording, verifying the checklist).

3 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers what ("Drafts and reviews GitHub pull request descriptions for the eve repository") and when ("Use when opening, updating, or reviewing a PR, or when summarizing a branch for reviewers") with four concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor. It is not level 4 because the when-clause is already explicit and specific, not merely present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when opening, updating, or reviewing a PR, or when summarizing a branch" supplies natural phrases a user would say, plus "pull request" spelled out. It sits below level 5 because common variations such as "PR body", "fill in the PR template", or "describe this diff" are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoping to "the eve repository" and to PR *descriptions* carves a clear niche, and the description is in third person. Minor overlap remains: "reviewing a PR" could also fire a code-review skill, so it does not fully reach the minimal-conflict anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

vercel/eve

Path

.agents/skills/gh-pr-description/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.