AC github-review-pr
Reviews or re-reviews one contributor pull request—including an explicitly named closed PR being reconsidered—or a bounded newest-to-oldest sweep of all open contributor PRs, for a GitHub repository maintainer against the current base branch. Handles base drift, history discontinuities, polluted branches, ownership, curation, supersession, and review-conditioned repair or landing using immutable Git snapshots, three-way merge results, isolated contribution projection, checks, tests, and findings-first reporting. Use for a PR URL or number, "main changed, review again", "review all open PRs newest to oldest", "apply our maintainer principles", "can we merge this and fix the rest ourselves?", or merge readiness. Do not use for general GitHub CRUD, repository-wide audits, CI-only diagnosis, security-only diff audits, unpushed local diffs, merely addressing existing review comments, or merging without a fresh review.
Reviews or re-reviews one contributor pull request—including an explicitly named closed PR being reconsidered—or a bounded newest-to-oldest sweep of all open…
As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 6565 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 374, 421): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 59/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 6565 tokens
- 85Steps. 50 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- medium 1 test cases, all positive: not one "should refuse" or "should ask first"
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
- +3Description length 926: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +4Structure: 18 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 50 items
- +4Has examples (15 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.