CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

mlava/scholar-sidekick-mcp

Use the connected scholar-sidekick-mcp MCP server when the user mentions a scholarly identifier (DOI, PMID, PMCID, ISBN, arXiv, ISSN, NASA ADS bibcode, WHO IRIS URL) and wants structured metadata, a formatted citation, a bibliography export file, a retraction check, an open-access check, or verification that a claimed citation is real (not fabricated). Requires the MCP server connected — it works anonymously, no API key required; for a zero-install path use the scholar-sidekick-api skill instead.

70

Quality

88%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

77%

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 MCP skill with excellent actionability and workflow clarity — Claude will know exactly which tools to call, with what parameters, and in what order. The main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (some sections repeat information or explain context that could be trimmed) and the monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting reference material (style lists, format lists, tool parameter schemas) into separate files. The safety constraints (never fabricate, verify tool availability before proceeding) are strong and well-placed.

Suggestions

Extract the style ID catalog and export format list into a separate REFERENCE.md to reduce the main skill's token footprint and improve progressive disclosure.

Remove or condense the 'When to Use' section, which largely duplicates the opening paragraph — a brief trigger list would suffice.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is reasonably well-organized but includes some unnecessary verbosity. The 'When to Use' section largely restates the intro, and some guidelines (e.g., explaining what WHO IRIS is, explaining the Topaz et al. citation pattern) add tokens that could be trimmed. However, most content is genuinely instructive and not explaining things Claude already knows.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides concrete tool names, exact parameter names and accepted values, specific style IDs, specific export format strings, and clear instructions on how to pass identifiers. The guidance is directly executable — Claude knows exactly which tool to call, with what parameters, in what shape.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The numbered steps (0–5) form a clear sequence: confirm tools available → pick tool → pass identifiers → batch appropriately → pick style/format → surface provenance. Step 0 includes an explicit validation checkpoint ('if tools are not available, stop'). The guidelines section adds important error-handling constraints (never fabricate, read verdicts carefully). The chaining workflow (resolve → format → export) is explicitly described.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is well-structured with clear sections and headers, but it's a fairly long monolithic document (~200 lines) with no bundle files or external references to offload detail. The extensive style ID lists, export format lists, and detailed tool parameter documentation could be split into reference files. For a standalone skill with no bundle, the inline detail is borderline acceptable but not ideal.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

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 its scope, lists concrete capabilities, includes abundant natural trigger terms covering scholarly identifiers and citation-related tasks, and explicitly addresses both 'what' and 'when'. It also proactively disambiguates from a related skill (scholar-sidekick-api), reducing conflict risk. The description is concise yet comprehensive.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: structured metadata retrieval, formatted citation generation, bibliography export file creation, retraction check, open-access check, and citation verification (fabrication detection). Very detailed and actionable.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (structured metadata, formatted citation, bibliography export, retraction check, open-access check, citation verification) and 'when' ('Use when the user mentions a scholarly identifier... and wants...'). Also includes disambiguation guidance against the scholar-sidekick-api skill.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: DOI, PMID, PMCID, ISBN, arXiv, ISSN, NASA ADS bibcode, WHO IRIS URL, citation, bibliography, retraction, open-access. These are exactly the terms a researcher would use.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive with a clear niche (scholarly identifiers and citation metadata via MCP server). Even distinguishes itself from a sibling skill (scholar-sidekick-api) with explicit guidance on when to use each, minimizing conflict risk.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

72%

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

Validation8 / 11 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

8

/

11

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents