CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/bug-tracker-workflow

Files, transitions, and searches bugs in the team's tracker - Jira, Linear, GitHub Issues, or Azure DevOps - through one tracker-agnostic workflow: authenticate, dedupe-search before creating, create with severity/priority classification, transition lifecycle states, and wire idempotent CI-driven filing from test failures. Jira Cloud REST API v3 is worked in full in the body (ADF descriptions, runtime transition lookup, JQL triage and duplicate queries, dry-run bulk transitions); Linear's GraphQL API (issueCreate/issueUpdate, workflowStates resolved by type, the 0-4 priority enum), GitHub Issues REST (open/closed + state_reason, label-based severity/priority), and Azure DevOps Work Item Tracking (JSON Patch, WIQL, process-template states) each have a deep reference. Use when programmatically managing the bug lifecycle on any of the four trackers: creating from CI failures, triaging queues, transitioning states, or dedupe-searching.

73

Quality

92%

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

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

92%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 executable, well-sequenced with validation checkpoints for batch/destructive operations, and cleanly splits overview from one-level-deep per-platform references that all exist. Slight conciseness cost from re-stating rules in prose that the code already demonstrates.

Suggestions

Collapse the 'Verify:' prose blocks where they merely restate behavior already visible in the adjacent code, to tighten token use.

Move the inline 'Note:' about severity custom fields fully to references/jira.md since the deep dive already covers it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient: executable code with tight prose and a comparison table; minor over-explanation (re-stating 'Jira's workflow engine maps cleanly', some 'Verify:' paragraphs repeat rules already shown in code).

4 / 5

Actionability

Copy-paste ready executable Python for auth, create, transition, JQL search, idempotent create, and bulk dry-run, plus a concrete GitHub Actions excerpt — covering the common cases fully.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: dry-run gating with count/key verification, fail-closed dedupe search, and per-step 'Verify:' notes with error-recovery guidance (400 ADF fix, 429 backoff) — matching the 5 anchor despite batch/destructive operations.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear overview with a per-platform table, one-level-deep references to four real reference files (jira, linear, github-issues, azuredevops — all present), and worked primary content inline; easy navigation with no nested references.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

91%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 concrete, trigger-rich, and explicitly pairs 'what' with 'when', covering four named trackers and specific workflow verbs. Its only weakness is a long scenario preamble that is vivid but not the phrasing a user would naturally utter.

Suggestions

Trim the opening scenario enumeration ('a weekly summary showing zero...') which pads length without adding trigger terms a user would say.

Add common synonym triggers a user might say verbatim, e.g. 'file a bug', 'reopen', 'duplicate bugs', 'defect report'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions ('Files, transitions, dedupes, and searches bugs', 'authenticate, dedupe-search before creating, classify severity and priority, transition lifecycle states, and wire idempotent CI-driven filing') across four named platforms — comprehensive coverage matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (the enumerated workflow actions and platforms) and 'when' ('Use when tracker data, defect metrics, or cross-board transitions are wrong or need automating') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural terms ('defect metrics', 'cross-board transitions', 'test failures', 'bug') plus platform names, but phrases like 'zero in the top severity band' are scenario-flavored rather than the synonyms a user would naturally say; a few common variants missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (tracker-agnostic defect bookkeeping across four named trackers with CI-driven filing) with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk with unrelated skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents