CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

mlava/scholar-sidekick-api

Resolve scholarly identifiers (DOI including shortDOI aliases, PMID, PMCID, ISBN, arXiv, ISSN, ADS bibcode, WHO IRIS URL) into formatted citations (10,000+ CSL styles) and bibliography exports (BibTeX, RIS, EndNote, CSV…), and check retraction, open-access, and citation-fabrication status — for one citation or a whole bibliography at once. Calls a documented REST API over plain HTTP — no install, no API key needed for the free tier. Use when the user has a DOI, PMID, PMCID, ISBN, arXiv ID, ISSN, ADS bibcode, or WHO IRIS URL and asks to format a citation, build or export a bibliography, check whether a paper is retracted, open-access, or a fabricated citation, or audit every reference in a .bib/.ris/CSL-JSON bibliography.

73

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

86%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a tight, executable API reference: copy-paste curl per endpoint, clear response shapes, and explicit verification plus a fabrication guardrail. The only real weakness is light repetition of the auth/free-tier messaging across three sections and the absence of an explicit retry loop for batch audit failures.

Suggestions

Collapse the no-key/free-tier auth messaging into one place (e.g. the 'Authentication & limits' section) and cross-reference it from the intro and MCP note instead of restating it.

Add a short 'validate → fix → retry' note for the batch /api/audit endpoint (e.g. on a per-entry status:error, how to re-submit just that entry) to complete the feedback loop for the batch operation.

The 'Topaz et al., Lancet 2026' aside inside /api/verify is an in-joke; replace it with a neutral one-line description of the mismatch pattern to keep the reference intent-focused.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no explaining what a DOI/BibTeX/CSL style is), but the no-key/free-tier/auth message recurs in the intro, the 'Authentication & limits' section, and the MCP note, which is minor repetition that could be trimmed — landing at the score-4 anchor rather than 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every endpoint ships a copy-paste curl command with real example payloads (e.g. 10.1038/nphys1170), documented response shapes, and field semantics — fully executable guidance covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Per-endpoint procedures are clearly sequenced with verification (health check, 'items[].formatted' non-empty), explicit error-isolation semantics for the batch audit endpoint, and a 'don't fabricate a fallback' guardrail; the gap is no explicit validate→fix→retry loop for failed batch entries, so it sits at 4 rather than 5 (the destructive/batch cap at 3 does not apply because validation guidance is present).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A single-file skill with no needed bundle files; sections (When to Use, Surfaces, Auth, Quick Reference table, Procedure, Pitfalls, Verification, Optional MCP) are well-organized with a navigation table, and external detail (openapi.yml, AGENTS.md, llms.txt, the companion MCP skill) is one-level-deep and clearly signaled rather than inlined.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is exemplary: it concisely states concrete capabilities, lists comprehensive natural trigger phrases with file extensions, and explicitly pairs a 'what' with a concrete 'Use when...' clause in third person. It is distinctive and unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — resolving identifiers into 'formatted citations (10,000+ CSL styles) and bibliography exports (BibTeX, RIS, EndNote, CSV…)' plus retraction/open-access/citation-fabrication checks — with comprehensive coverage of identifier types and output formats, matching the score-5 anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (resolve identifiers into citations/exports; integrity checks) and when via a concrete 'Use when the user has ... and asks to ...' clause with specific trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural trigger terms including synonyms and file extensions: 'format a citation, build or export a bibliography, check whether a paper is retracted, open-access, or a fabricated citation, or audit every reference in a .bib/.ris/CSL-JSON bibliography'.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (scholarly identifier → citation/integrity) with distinct, identifier-gated triggers; it scopes to already-known identifiers and points elsewhere for topic discovery, minimizing conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents