SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AD create-merge-request-changelog

Analyze git branches and generate structured MR/PR descriptions with domain-based change categorization — bug fixes, enhancements, technical debt, documentation, testing, build/CI, and non-functional changes. Use when preparing merge request descriptions, pull request bodies, writing changelogs from git diffs, documenting branch changes, or generating release notes. Works with GitHub and GitLab without requiring JIRA or issue tracker integration.

Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills Claude Code author: Jamie-BitFlight MIT 7 files · 3 scripts body ≈ 4 035 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

Analyze git branches and generate structured MR/PR descriptions with domain-based change categorization — bug fixes, enhancements, technical debt…

As a process D 44/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerGitHubGitLabJiraWriting and documentsSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
91
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
44/100
Unfinished process
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 44/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 30 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web, python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4035 tokens
    • 85Steps. 112 steps, 2 vague phrases
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 450: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 43 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 112 items
    • +4Has examples (16 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
    • +3All 3 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 91.