Write professional, persuasive complaint letters to US airlines emphasizing loyalty status, DOT regulations, and airline commitments.
93
94%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
93%
1.38xAverage score across 10 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 an excellent skill description that clearly defines a specific niche (US airline complaint letters), lists concrete capabilities, and provides extensive trigger guidance covering both user intents and situational triggers. The description is comprehensive without being padded, uses third person voice correctly, and would be easily distinguishable from other skills in a large skill library.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: write complaint letters, request compensation, dispute responses, escalate issues, file DOT complaints. Also specifies concrete techniques like emphasizing loyalty status, DOT regulations, and airline published commitments. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (write professional complaint letters emphasizing loyalty status, DOT regulations, and airline commitments) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause with extensive trigger scenarios covering both actions and situations). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'complain to an airline', 'request compensation', 'complaint letter', 'bad flight experience', 'flight delay', 'cancellation', 'lost baggage', 'denied boarding', 'downgrade', 'missed connection', 'DOT complaint'. These are highly natural phrases a user would actually use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche: US airline complaint letters specifically. The combination of airline-specific terminology, DOT regulations, loyalty status, and the specific complaint scenarios makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-crafted, complex skill that orchestrates a multi-phase workflow with clear sequencing, validation gates, and concrete guidance at every step. Its greatest strengths are the actionable specificity (exact commands, letter templates, escalation criteria) and excellent progressive disclosure via reference files. Minor verbosity in some sections and occasional redundancy (FlightAware attribution mentioned multiple times) prevent a perfect conciseness score, but overall the content is high quality.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly long but most content is genuinely instructive and specific to the task. Some sections could be tightened — e.g., the letter construction phase repeats guidance about FlightAware attribution multiple times, and some instructions like 'facts speak for themselves' are unnecessary for Claude. However, the bulk of the content earns its place given the complexity of the multi-phase workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides highly concrete, executable guidance throughout: specific CLI commands for the scripts, exact letter structure with example subject lines and quote templates, specific escalation channels, precise timelines (14-21 business days, 30 days for DOT), and clear decision criteria for when to file DOT complaints immediately vs. wait. The letter construction section includes copy-paste-ready quote framing patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-phase workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit gates between phases: flight verification must complete before research, research must yield usable findings from items 1-6 before writing, and the letter must be finalized before filing to the complaint bank. Validation checkpoints are present — cross-checking user claims against FlightAware, confirming understanding with the user before proceeding, and the research gate. Error recovery is addressed (discrepancies trigger clarification, missing data triggers questions). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent use of progressive disclosure. The main skill file serves as a clear overview and workflow orchestrator, with detailed procedures delegated to well-signaled reference files (flight-verification.md, research-strategy.md, compensation.md) and utility scripts. References are one level deep, clearly labeled with their purpose, and linked at both the top of the file and inline where relevant. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.
Reviewed
Table of Contents