Skills that Improve Development loops run: review pull request history for agent context and Tessl verifier improvements, and read recent agent runs to record recurring problems as project findings.
77
97%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Create coverage/area-1.json, coverage/area-2.json and coverage/area-3.json before investigating. Keep them separate from candidate notes. Each record contains area, question, paths, evidenceRevision, checks and decision. Initialize every required check as pending; do not fill the records from memory at the end.
Required keys under checks are pathHistory, relatedDiscussions, fileInventories, selectedThreads, correctionHunks, currentImplementation, applicableGuidance, applicableVerifiers and candidateDecision. Each check has this shape:
{ "status": "pending", "evidence": [], "conclusion": "", "blocker": null }Update the relevant check immediately after examining evidence. Change its status to complete only when evidence names saved raw files and exact PR/thread IDs, source ranges or guidance sections actually read, and conclusion states what those reads establish. A downloaded response, title, search hit, truncated excerpt or assertion that something is covered cannot pass a check. Follow the investigation steps in Investigating one area to decide what evidence is sufficient; these gates do not require exhaustive repository history or multiple independent cases.
A supported negative result can pass: for example, related history examined but irrelevant, advice refuted with no correction to recommend, or existing context and verifiers already covering the relevant decision and property. Record the examined evidence and reason. Missing evidence cannot pass by calling the hypothesis weak or recording a zero-finding outcome. Candidate decisions are retain, reject or no-supported-candidate, with an evidence-backed reason in decision; a retained candidate remains in notes until the delivery gate passes.
Use blocked only for an external failure that prevents the required read after reasonable recovery attempts. Its blocker must contain the affected operation, observed error, attempted alternatives and why no available alternative can complete the check. A malformed query, recoverable truncation, missing local dependency, unavailable publication endpoint or successful lookup on another branch does not by itself establish an unrecoverable blocker. Preserve the evidence revision when recovering reads.
Area gate: reread the area's coverage record and inspect its referenced evidence before moving to the next area. Every required key must be present and complete. If any check remains pending, perform its next missing read rather than drafting a report. If one hypothesis is unusable, pursue another in that area or replace the area and reset its record. Keep rejected evidence in notes. An unrecoverable external blocker permits a failed ending, with the operation and recovery evidence reported; it never makes the area complete.
Delivery gate: leave proposals/ empty and make no Findings writes until all three distinct areas pass their area gates. Reread all three records, verify the referenced evidence and resolve contradictions between their statuses and notes. Perform missing checks before deduplication and payload creation. An incomplete candidate belongs only in notes, not a proposal marked "not ready to publish". Rehearsals use exactly the same gates.
Finalization gate: a successful result requires all three records to pass and every retained candidate to have a recorded deduplication and delivery outcome. If a check remains doable, take that action instead of writing the final report or launch result. Reporting incomplete work honestly does not pass a gate. If an external blocker prevents completion, report failure and link its coverage record and observed recovery evidence. Never invent an execution limit or blocker to justify ending.