Differential Security Review
trailofbits/skills
Reviews a pull request, commit or diff for security problems, using git history, caller counts and test coverage, and writes a markdown report.
Reviews the tests added in a pull request for fix coverage, quality, edge cases and test type, and recommends lighter test types where they would do.
Install Evaluate PR Tests
$ npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install dotnet/maui evaluate-pr-tests --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests .claude/skills/evaluate-pr-tests && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "evaluate-pr-tests" agent skill from https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests into .claude/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "evaluate-pr-tests", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-testsType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install dotnet/maui evaluate-pr-tests --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests .agents/skills/evaluate-pr-tests && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "evaluate-pr-tests" agent skill from https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests into .agents/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "evaluate-pr-tests", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install dotnet/maui evaluate-pr-tests --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests .cursor/skills/evaluate-pr-tests && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "evaluate-pr-tests" agent skill from https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests into .cursor/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "evaluate-pr-tests", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git --path .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install dotnet/maui evaluate-pr-tests --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests .gemini/skills/evaluate-pr-tests && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "evaluate-pr-tests" agent skill from https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests into .gemini/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "evaluate-pr-tests", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install dotnet/maui evaluate-pr-testsInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "evaluate-pr-tests" agent skill from https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests into .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "evaluate-pr-tests", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install dotnet/maui evaluate-pr-tests --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dotnet/maui.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests .opencode/skills/evaluate-pr-tests && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "evaluate-pr-tests" agent skill from https://github.com/dotnet/maui/tree/main/.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests into .opencode/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "evaluate-pr-tests", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
evaluate-pr-tests- GitHub stars
- 23k
- Token cost
- ~2.9k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 1,055 words
- Files
- 3 (incl. scripts)
- Skills in repo
- 27
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
Reviews the tests added in a pull request for fix coverage, quality, edge cases and test type, and recommends lighter test types where they would do.
- Works in 12 steps: Gather Automated Context → Understand the Fix → Evaluate the Tests → …
- Reviewing whether the tests in a PR actually cover the fix
- SKILL.md covers When to Use, Quick Start, Workflow and Evaluation Criteria, plus 3 more sections
- Runs PowerShell scripts from its folder; calls pwsh
What it does
The skill reviews the tests added in a pull request and produces a structured report with actionable findings. It first runs `Gather-TestContext.ps1`, which writes a context report covering file categorization (fix files versus test files), convention checks for naming, attributes and anti-patterns, AutomationId consistency between the host app and the tests, similar existing tests and platform scope. The agent then reads the fix to learn what changed, why and which edge cases exist.
Each test file is judged against a list of criteria, starting with fix coverage: does the test exercise the changed code path, would it fail if the fix were reverted, and does it assert the behavior that was broken. Every criterion gets a pass, concern or fail verdict with an explanation. The skill also pushes toward lighter test types, preferring unit tests over device tests over UI tests, and a PR with no tests gets a fail verdict on coverage. The excerpt ends within the criteria list.
When your agent uses it
- Reviewing whether the tests in a PR actually cover the fix
- Checking if a lighter test type could replace a UI test
- Assessing test quality before merging a pull request
Example prompts
- “Evaluate the tests in this PR and tell me whether they would fail if the fix were reverted.”
- “Are these tests good enough? Check whether a unit test could replace the UI test.”
- “Assess test coverage for the PR before I merge it.”
Requirements
- git, PowerShell and the gh CLI for PR context
- Compatibility (from SKILL.md): Requires git, PowerShell, and gh CLI for PR context.
Workflow steps
12 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 7d38fd0. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
Ships 1 file in scripts/ (PowerShell), which the agent can run.
Shell commands in SKILL.md call:
pwsh
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Compatibility
Requires git, PowerShell, and gh CLI for PR context.
From compatibility in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Context cost
Evaluate PR Tests loads about 2.9k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 107 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,055 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); the scripts in this folder are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from dotnet/maui at commit 7d38fd0, republished under its MIT licence (© dotnet). 1,055 words, ~2,949 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 2 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.- name
- evaluate-pr-tests
- description
- Evaluates tests added in a PR for coverage, quality, edge cases, and test type appropriateness. Checks if tests cover the fix, finds gaps, and recommends lighter test types when possible. Prefer unit tests over device tests over UI tests. Triggers on: 'evaluate tests in PR', 'review test quality', 'are these tests good enough', 'check test coverage', 'is this test adequate', 'assess test coverage for PR'.
- compatibility
- Requires git, PowerShell, and gh CLI for PR context.
- metadata.author
- dotnet-maui
- metadata.version
- 1.0
Evaluate PR Tests
Evaluates the quality, coverage, and appropriateness of tests added in a PR. Produces a structured report with actionable findings.
When to Use
- ✅ PR has tests and you want to evaluate their quality
- ⚠️ PR has no test files -- output a ❌ Fix Coverage verdict noting no tests were added; skip remaining criteria
- ✅ Reviewing whether tests adequately cover the fix
- ✅ Checking if a lighter test type could be used instead
- ✅ Before merging a PR, as part of review
Quick Start
# Auto-detect PR and base branch
pwsh .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/scripts/Gather-TestContext.ps1
# With explicit base branch
pwsh .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/scripts/Gather-TestContext.ps1 -BaseBranch "origin/main"Workflow
Step 1: Gather Automated Context
Run the script to get file categorization, convention checks, and anti-pattern detection:
pwsh .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests/scripts/Gather-TestContext.ps1This produces a report at CustomAgentLogsTmp/TestEvaluation/context.md with:
- File categorization (fix files vs test files by type)
- Convention compliance checks (naming, attributes, anti-patterns)
- AutomationId consistency (HostApp ↔ test)
- Existing similar tests
- Platform scope analysis
Step 2: Understand the Fix
Read the fix files to understand:
- What changed — which code paths were modified
- Why it changed — the bug being fixed (from PR description or linked issue)
- Edge cases — what boundary conditions exist in the changed code
Step 3: Evaluate the Tests
Read each test file and evaluate against all criteria below. For each criterion, provide a verdict (✅ Pass, ⚠️ Concern, ❌ Fail) with explanation.
Step 4: Produce the Report
Output a structured evaluation report (see Output Format below).
Evaluation Criteria
1. Fix Coverage
Question: Does the test exercise the actual code paths changed by the fix?
How to check:
- Trace the test's actions through the code to the fix location
- Would the test fail if the fix were reverted?
- Does the test assert on the specific behavior that was broken?
Red flags:
- Test only checks that a page loads (doesn't exercise the fix)
- Test asserts on a different property/behavior than what was fixed
- Test interacts with the control but doesn't trigger the buggy code path
Example — Good:
// Fix: CollectionView.SelectedItem setter now clears selection when set to null
// Test: Sets SelectedItem to null and verifies selection is cleared
App.Tap("SelectItem");
App.Tap("ClearSelection"); // Sets SelectedItem = null
var text = App.FindElement("SelectionStatus").GetText();
Assert.That(text, Is.EqualTo("None")); // Directly tests the fixExample — Bad:
// Fix: CollectionView.SelectedItem setter
// Test: Just checks CollectionView renders (doesn't test selection clearing)
App.WaitForElement("MyCollectionView");
Assert.That(true); // Proves nothing about the fix2. Edge Cases & Gaps
Question: Does the test cover boundary conditions, or only the happy path?
Check for these common gaps:
| Gap Type | What to Look For |
|---|---|
| Null/empty | Does the fix handle null? Is it tested? |
| Boundary values | Min, max, zero, negative, very large |
| Repeated actions | Does calling the action twice cause issues? |
| Platform-specific | Does the bug only occur on certain platforms? |
| Async/timing | Does the fix involve async code? Race conditions? |
| State transitions | Does the test cover before→after state changes? |
| Error paths | What happens when the operation fails? |
| Combination effects | Does the fix interact with other properties/features? |
How to suggest missing edge cases:
- Read the fix code and identify every conditional branch
- For each branch, check if the test covers it
- Look for
if (x == null),if (x <= 0), try/catch blocks - Consider: "What inputs would make this fix NOT work?"
3. Test Type Appropriateness
Question: Is this the lightest test type that can verify the fix?
Preference order (lightest → heaviest):
| Priority | Type | When Appropriate | Project |
|---|---|---|---|
| ⭐ 1st | Unit Test | Pure logic, property changes, data transformations, binding behavior, event wiring | *.UnitTests.csproj |
| ⭐ 1st | XAML Test | XAML parsing, XamlC compilation, source generation, markup extensions | Controls.Xaml.UnitTests |
| ⭐⭐ 2nd | Device Test | Platform-specific rendering, native API interaction, handler mapping | *.DeviceTests.csproj |
| ⭐⭐⭐ 3rd | UI Test | User interaction flows, visual layout, screenshot comparison, end-to-end scenarios | TestCases.Shared.Tests |
Decision tree:
Does the test need to interact with visual UI elements?
YES → Is it checking visual layout/appearance?
YES → UI test (VerifyScreenshot) ✅
NO → Could the interaction be tested via handler/control API?
YES → Device test ⭐⭐
NO → UI test ✅
NO → Does it need a platform/native context?
YES → Device test ⭐⭐
NO → Does it test XAML parsing/compilation?
YES → XAML test ⭐
NO → Unit test ⭐Common "could be lighter" patterns:
| Current Test Does | Could Be Instead | Why |
|---|---|---|
| UI test: sets property, checks label text | Unit test | Property logic doesn't need UI |
| UI test: verifies event fires | Unit test | Event wiring is testable in isolation |
| UI test: checks control doesn't crash | Device test | Don't need Appium for crash testing |
| UI test: validates XAML binding | XAML test | Binding resolution is compile-time |
| Device test: checks property default | Unit test | Defaults don't need platform context |
Show full SKILL.md (460 more words)Show less
4. Convention Compliance
Automated by the script. Review the script output for:
UI Tests:
- File naming:
IssueXXXXX.cs [Issue()]attribute on HostApp page[Category()]attribute — exactly ONE per test class (on the class or method, not both)_IssuesUITestbase classWaitForElementbefore interactions- No
Task.Delay/Thread.Sleep - No inline
#if ANDROID/#if IOS - No obsolete APIs (
Application.MainPage,Frame,Device.BeginInvokeOnMainThread) UITestEntry/UITestEditorfor screenshot tests
Unit Tests:
[Fact]or[Theory]attributes (xUnit)
XAML Tests:
[Test]with[Values] XamlInflatorparameter- Issue naming:
MauiXXXXX
5. Flakiness Risk
Question: Is this test likely to be flaky in CI?
| Risk Factor | Detection | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Arbitrary delays | Task.Delay, Thread.Sleep | Use WaitForElement, retryTimeout |
| Missing waits | App.Tap without prior WaitForElement | Add explicit waits |
| Screenshot timing | VerifyScreenshot() without retryTimeout | Add retryTimeout: TimeSpan.FromSeconds(2) |
| Cursor blink | Entry/Editor in screenshot test | Use UITestEntry/UITestEditor |
| External URLs | WebView loading remote content | Use mock URLs or local content |
| Animation timing | Visual check after animation | Use retryTimeout |
| Global state | Test modifies Application.Current | Ensure cleanup in teardown |
6. Duplicate Coverage
Question: Does a similar test already exist?
Check the "Existing Similar Tests" section of the script output. If similar tests exist:
- Is the new test covering a different scenario? → OK
- Is the new test redundant? → Flag as concern
- Could the new test be merged with an existing one? → Suggest consolidation
7. Platform Scope
Question: Does the test run on all platforms affected by the fix?
Check the "Platform Scope Analysis" from the script:
- Cross-platform fix → tests should run on all platforms
- Platform-specific fix → test on that platform is sufficient
- Fix affects iOS + MacCatalyst → both should be tested (
.ios.cscompiles for both)
8. Assertion Quality
Question: Are the assertions specific enough to catch regressions?
| Assertion Quality | Example | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| ✅ Specific | Assert.That(label.Text, Is.EqualTo("Expected Value")) | Catches regression |
| ⚠️ Vague | Assert.That(label.Text, Is.Not.Null) | Too permissive |
| ❌ Meaningless | Assert.That(true) or no assertion | Proves nothing |
| ✅ Positional | Assert.That(rect.Y, Is.GreaterThan(safeAreaTop)) | Specific to layout fix |
| ⚠️ Brittle | Assert.That(rect.Y, Is.EqualTo(47)) | Magic number, will break |
9. Fix-Test Alignment
Question: Do the files changed by the fix align with what the test exercises?
- Map the fix files to the controls/features they affect
- Map the test to the controls/features it exercises
- Flag if test exercises a different control than the fix changes
- Flag if test only covers one platform when fix touches multiple
Red flags:
- Test class is named
Issue12345for a fix inCollectionViewbut only exercisesLabelrendering - Fix changes
Shell.csbut test only navigates aContentPage
Output Format
Produce the evaluation report in this format:
## PR Test Evaluation Report
**PR:** #XXXXX — [Title]
**Test files evaluated:** [count]
**Fix files:** [count]
---
### Overall Verdict
[One of: ✅ Tests are adequate | ⚠️ Tests need improvement | ❌ Tests are insufficient]
[1-2 sentence summary of the most important finding]
---
### 1. Fix Coverage — [✅/⚠️/❌]
[Does the test exercise the code paths changed by the fix?]
### 2. Edge Cases & Gaps — [✅/⚠️/❌]
**Covered:**
- [edge case 1]
- [edge case 2]
**Missing:**
- [gap 1 — describe what should be tested and why]
- [gap 2]
### 3. Test Type Appropriateness — [✅/⚠️/❌]
**Current:** [UI Test / Device Test / Unit Test / XAML Test]
**Recommendation:** [Same / Could be lighter — explain why]
### 4. Convention Compliance — [✅/⚠️/❌]
[Summary from automated checks — list only issues found]
### 5. Flakiness Risk — [✅ Low / ⚠️ Medium / ❌ High]
[Specific risk factors identified]
### 6. Duplicate Coverage — [✅ No duplicates / ⚠️ Potential overlap]
[Similar existing tests found, if any]
### 7. Platform Scope — [✅/⚠️/❌]
[Does test coverage match the platforms affected by the fix?]
### 8. Assertion Quality — [✅/⚠️/❌]
[Are assertions specific enough to catch the actual bug?]
### 9. Fix-Test Alignment — [✅/⚠️/❌]
[Do the test and fix target the same code paths?]
---
### Recommendations
1. [Most important actionable recommendation]
2. [Second recommendation]
3. [...]Output Files
| File | Description |
|---|---|
CustomAgentLogsTmp/TestEvaluation/context.md | Automated context report from script |
Troubleshooting
| Problem | Cause | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| No changed files detected | Wrong base branch | Use -BaseBranch explicitly |
| No fix files detected | All changes are tests | Expected for test-only PRs |
| AutomationId mismatch | HostApp and test out of sync | Update one to match the other |
| Convention check false positive | Script regex too broad | Ignore and note in report |
© dotnet, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
SKILL.md and 2 other files (scripts) in .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests of dotnet/maui.
- SKILL.md
- scripts/Gather-TestContext.ps1
- tests/eval.vally.yaml
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 7d38fd0
Compare with similar skills
Evaluate PR Tests next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluate PR Tests this skilldotnet/maui | 23k | — | ~2.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Differential Security Reviewtrailofbits/skills | 7.4k | — | ~1.8k | Automated safety check: Notes | CC-BY-SA-4.0 | |
| Code Review WorkflowResgrid/Core | 229 | — | ~2.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Reviewatelier-fashion/adlc-toolkit | 171 | — | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Code Reviewpolyipseity/obsidian-terminal | 948 | — | ~1.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | AGPL-3.0 | |
| Core Components Code Reviewcore-ds/core-components | 137 | — | ~5.4k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT |
Similar skills
- Official
Code Review Workflow
Resgrid/Core
Structured code review workflow for .NET projects using Roslyn MCP tools.
Review
atelier-fashion/adlc-toolkit
Multi-agent code review covering correctness, quality, architecture, test coverage, and security
Code Review
polyipseity/obsidian-terminal
A skill your agent uses when reviewing PRs, code changes, or conducting code audits in obsidian-terminal.
Core Components Code Review
core-ds/core-components
Review a Pull Request or diff in the @alfalab/core-components UI library — correctness bugs, public API/breaking changes, accessibility, keyboard/focus/pointer interaction, component states…
PR Deep Verification
QwenLM/qwen-code
Runs a sandboxed, evidence-based check of one qwen-code pull request, proving its main change against the base build and writing a report with a machine-readable verdict.
More from dotnet/maui
All 27 skills in this repo- Official
Copilot Session Failure Analysis
dotnet/maui
Mines local Copilot CLI session logs for dotnet/maui to rank costly or failing runs, tag recurring failure modes, propose repo edits and emit guard evals.
- Official
.NET MAUI Release Readiness
dotnet/maui
Produces evidence-backed ship-readiness verdicts for .NET MAUI Servicing Releases and Previews, and drafts public-safe release handoff pages from the result.
- Official
MAUI PR Performance Analysis
dotnet/maui
Interprets pinned managed benchmark evidence for a dotnet/maui pull request and writes a narrative for the performance review workflow, without running or publishing anything.
- Official
PR Finalize
dotnet/maui
Checks that a pull request's title and description match its implementation and reviews the code for best practices before merge, without posting anything.
- Official
.NET MAUI Dependency Flow Guide
dotnet/maui
Adds MAUI-specific guardrails on top of the maestro-cli skill and Maestro MCP tools for darc, BAR, and channel or feed lookups in dotnet/maui.
- Official
MAUI CI Investigator
dotnet/maui
Adds dotnet/maui-specific context for investigating failing PR checks and broken nightly builds: pipelines, Helix logs, binlogs and merge-readiness verdicts.
Related
Works with
Categories
Questions about Evaluate PR Tests
What does Evaluate PR Tests do?
Reviews the tests added in a pull request for fix coverage, quality, edge cases and test type, and recommends lighter test types where they would do. The skill reviews the tests added in a pull request and produces a structured report with actionable findings.ps1`, which writes a context report covering file categorization (fix files versus test files), convention checks for naming, attributes and anti-patterns, AutomationId consistency between the host app and the tests, similar existing tests and platform scope.
When should I use Evaluate PR Tests?
Evaluate PR Tests fits situations like: reviewing whether the tests in a PR actually cover the fix; checking if a lighter test type could replace a UI test; assessing test quality before merging a pull request.
How do I install Evaluate PR Tests in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests in dotnet/maui) into .claude/skills/evaluate-pr-tests in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Evaluate PR Tests in Codex?
Run `npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (.github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests in dotnet/maui) into .agents/skills/evaluate-pr-tests in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Evaluate PR Tests in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add dotnet/maui --skill evaluate-pr-tests -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/evaluate-pr-tests, .gemini/skills/evaluate-pr-tests, .github/skills/evaluate-pr-tests and .opencode/skills/evaluate-pr-tests in your project.
What does Evaluate PR Tests need to run?
Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Evaluate PR Tests needs PowerShell for the scripts in its folder and the command-line tools its instructions call (pwsh). Our summary lists: git, PowerShell and the gh CLI for PR context. Compatibility (from SKILL.md): Requires git, PowerShell, and gh CLI for PR context..
Does Evaluate PR Tests access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Evaluate PR Tests safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. The check reads SKILL.md only: the scripts in the folder are not scanned, so read them before running anything.
What licence does Evaluate PR Tests use?
Evaluate PR Tests is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Evaluate PR Tests use?
About 2.9k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 12k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Evaluate PR Tests?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Evaluate PR Tests: Differential Security Review (trailofbits/skills, 7.4k stars), Code Review Workflow (Resgrid/Core, 229 stars), Review (atelier-fashion/adlc-toolkit, 171 stars) and Code Review (polyipseity/obsidian-terminal, 948 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Evaluate PR Tests?
dotnet (a GitHub organization, an official publisher) maintains it in dotnet/maui, which has 23,322 GitHub stars. The repository holds 27 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 7, 2026.
Source: dotnet/maui on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.