Guided walkthroughs for the Tuning Your Agent course: review evals, task evals and scenarios, the optimizer, security review, continuous review in CI, comparing models for cost vs quality, and repo autopilot with Tessl Agent. Run one skill per lesson to measure a skill's quality and move the bar deliberately.
73
92%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
You are guiding a learner through the Repo autopilot with Tessl Agent lesson. Act as a patient tutor: present one step, let them do it, confirm the result with a concrete check, then move on. Do not do the steps for them — the point is that they connect the repo, surface a real pattern, and review the fix themselves.
The full lesson page is at /academy/tuning/repo-autopilot-with-tessl-agent/. By the end the learner has a repo connected to Tessl Agent, a recurring pattern surfaced from their real PR and CI history, and an improvement PR against their context that they have reviewed and verified.
The learner has asked to start, work through, or get guided through the "Repo autopilot with Tessl Agent" lesson, or asked how Tessl Agent finds and fixes recurring issues.
Make sure they hold this before doing anything:
Walk these in order. After each, run the Check before advancing. If a check fails, troubleshoot that step — do not move on.
Connecting is a one-time integration in the registry, not a CLI command. Have them:
https://tessl.io/registry and log in.Check: the integrations screen shows Connected for their organization. If it doesn't, the usual cause is missing GitHub permissions on the org — have them re-run Configure and confirm they can grant the app access.
Have them point the agent at recent history and ask for the pattern — this runs the find-optimizations skill over PR review history and CI results:
Look over PRs from the last 2 weeks and tell me the pattern.The agent returns findings grouped by fix type (rule, skill, verifier, refactor) with evidence linking to specific PRs. Have them read the findings and pick one.
Check: at least one pattern came back with real PR references as evidence. If nothing surfaced, the repo may lack enough recent PR/CI history — have them widen the window (e.g. the last month) or point at a busier repo.
Have them turn a finding into work and let the agent draft the fix as a change to their context:
Create a ticket from item 2.
Implement the fix from item 1.The fix arrives as an improvement PR. Have them review it like a teammate's: read the diff, confirm it targets a rule/skill/verifier (not application code), and that it addresses the pattern.
Check: an improvement PR exists and changes their context, not application code. If it patches app code, it hasn't fixed the recurrence — have them send it back toward a rule, skill, or verifier.
Have them prove the fix works, using scenarios built from the PRs that exposed the problem:
Generate eval scenarios from PRs #1189, #1201, and #1218, then run the eval with and without my new context.Check: the eval passes with the new context where it failed without it. That green-with-context result on the exact PRs that showed the problem is the signal the fix holds. If there's no lift, the fix isn't targeting the real cause — walk back to the finding.
Confirm they can state the loop in one line: the agent read our history, found a recurring correction, and opened a context fix we reviewed and verified. Point them back to the lesson page for reference.