github-pr-workflow
Working with GitHub Pull Requests using the gh CLI. Use for fetching PR details, review comments, CI status, and understanding the difference between PR-level comments vs inline code review comments.
90
89%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
85%
1.06xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description that clearly identifies its domain (GitHub Pull Requests via gh CLI), lists specific capabilities, and provides explicit trigger guidance. The inclusion of nuanced concepts like the distinction between PR-level and inline review comments adds valuable specificity. Minor improvement could include mentioning file extensions or additional user phrasings like 'check PR status' or 'list PRs'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'fetching PR details, review comments, CI status' and clarifies the distinction between 'PR-level comments vs inline code review comments'. These are concrete, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (fetching PR details, review comments, CI status, understanding comment types) and 'when' ('Use for fetching PR details, review comments, CI status'). The 'Use for...' clause serves as an explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'GitHub', 'Pull Requests', 'PR', 'gh CLI', 'review comments', 'CI status'. These cover common terms a user would naturally use when needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: GitHub PRs via the gh CLI. The mention of specific PR concepts like 'PR-level comments vs inline code review comments' and 'CI status' makes it unlikely to conflict with general git or code review skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
79%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, practical skill that efficiently communicates the critical distinction between PR comment types and provides actionable commands. Its main weaknesses are the truncated workflow section and lack of references to the script's implementation or additional documentation. The content respects Claude's intelligence and avoids unnecessary explanation.
Suggestions
Complete the truncated 'Workflow: Addressing Review Comments' section with all steps including a validation checkpoint (e.g., re-running gh-pr-info after pushing fixes to confirm comments are resolved).
Add a link or reference to where the `gh-pr-info` script is located so Claude can find/verify it.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient. It doesn't explain what PRs are or how GitHub works—it jumps straight into the distinction between comment types (which is genuinely non-obvious) and provides concrete commands. The table format for scripts is efficient. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable commands throughout: gh CLI commands, API endpoints with exact paths, and a custom script with clear usage syntax. Everything is copy-paste ready with placeholder patterns that are easy to substitute. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Addressing Review Comments' workflow at the end is truncated (only 2 steps shown, cuts off mid-content). While the commands section is well-organized, the incomplete workflow and lack of validation steps (e.g., verifying fixes address the comments, re-running checks) prevent a score of 3. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content references a script `gh-pr-info` but doesn't link to its source or documentation. The structure is reasonable with clear sections, but the API endpoints reference section could be split to a separate file to keep the main skill focused on the workflow. No external file references are provided. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- YPares/agent-skills
- Commit
a212b5a
- 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.