CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

github-issues

Read SD.Next GitHub issues with the literal string [Issue] in the title and produce a phased markdown report: short summary first, then status, then suggested next steps per issue.

57

Quality

66%

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 ./.github/skills/github-issues/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

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

The content is actionable with concrete tools and an exact search template, and it sequences the workflow clearly. It loses points for a missing validation/verification checkpoint in a batch operation and for being a monolithic inline document longer than the simple-skill threshold with no progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation/verification step for the batch operation — e.g., confirm the number of fetched issue details matches the search results, and handle per-issue fetch failures before building summaries.

Tighten redundant scope statements across 'When To Use' and 'Pass Criteria', or consolidate them, to reduce token cost.

Consider splitting the per-issue output format or reporting rules into a short reference file to apply progressive disclosure, since the body exceeds the simple-skill length threshold.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient procedural guidance with no concept-explanation filler (no 'what is a GitHub issue' padding) and assumes Claude's competence, but sections like 'When To Use' and 'Pass Criteria' restate the same scope, and it could be tightened. It is not score 1 because there is no verbosity explaining known concepts, and not score 3 because of the redundancy and length (~98 lines).

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides a concrete search query template ('is:issue in:title "[Issue]" repo:vladmandic/sdnext'), named tools ('github-pull-request_doSearch', 'github-pull-request_issue_fetch'), and explicit output columns — actionable, copy-ready guidance. This is an instruction-only skill where executable guidance, not code, is the metric, so it earns 3 rather than 2.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-step sequence (Search, Fetch, Build summary, Produce report) is present, but this is a batch operation over multiple issues with no validation or verification checkpoint (e.g., confirm fetched count vs. matched count, handle fetch errors). Per the rubric, missing validation in batch operations caps workflow clarity at 2; it is not score 1 because the steps are clearly sequenced.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized but the skill is monolithic (~98 lines, well over the 50-line simple-skill threshold) with all detail inline and no external reference files (none of references/scripts/assets exist). It is not score 3 because the simple-skills allowance does not apply at this length and no one-level-deep references split the content; not score 1 because organization is reasonable rather than a wall of text.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

67%

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 specific and distinctive, clearly stating what the skill does and its narrow target (SD.Next issues with '[Issue]' in the title). Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 2.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when the user asks for a triage summary or status report of SD.Next issues containing [Issue] in the title.'

Include a few natural user phrasings (e.g., 'issue triage', 'status report', 'next steps') alongside the technical [Issue] filter to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions: 'Read SD.Next GitHub issues with the literal string [Issue] in the title', 'produce a phased markdown report: short summary first, then status, then suggested next steps per issue'. This matches the score-3 anchor listing several specific concrete actions; it is not score 2 because it goes beyond naming a domain and some actions to enumerate three distinct output phases.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what' (read issues, produce a phased report) but lacks any 'when' trigger — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent guidance in the description. Per the judging guidelines, a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 2; it is not score 1 because the 'what' is strong and explicit.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains domain-relevant keywords ('SD.Next GitHub issues', '[Issue] in the title', 'markdown report') but leans on the technical literal-title filter rather than covering natural user phrasings like 'triage', 'summarize issues', or 'issue report'. It is not score 1 because there are recognizable keywords, and not score 3 because common variations a user would actually say are missing.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The literal '[Issue]' title-string filter plus the 'SD.Next' repository target carve out a clear niche unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills. It is not score 2 because the trigger is distinctive enough to avoid overlap with generic GitHub-issue skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

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
vladmandic/sdnext
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.