oh-my-ai/reading-synthesis
Produces a thirteen-part rigorous synthesis of a reading or talk—structure, insights, critique, framework rebuild, actions, and a compressed executive summary—for semi-technical audiences.
77
96%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
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 a strong skill description that excels across all dimensions. It provides specific concrete actions, comprehensive trigger terms that match natural user language, clearly answers both what and when, and carves out a distinctive niche with its thirteen-part synthesis methodology. The description is information-dense without being padded, and uses appropriate third-person voice throughout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'deep summary, insights, structure, critique, framework rebuild, and CEO-level takeaways' along with specific tools used (Read, WebSearch, WebFetch) and output format details. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (thirteen-part synthesis with deep summary, insights, structure, critique, framework rebuild, CEO-level takeaways) and 'when' (explicit trigger terms listed, plus conditions like 'when comparands are missing or context is thin' for tool usage). The 'Triggers:' clause serves as an explicit 'Use when' equivalent. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'reading synthesis', 'synthesize this', 'deep dive', 'rigorous analysis', 'deconstruct', 'book analysis', 'article analysis', 'essay breakdown', 'intellectual synthesis', 'framework extraction', 'executive summary of ideas'. These are natural phrases a user would actually use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: a rigorous thirteen-part synthesis framework for texts/talks. The specific methodology (thirteen parts, fixed section headers, framework rebuild) and domain (intellectual synthesis of readings) make it unlikely to conflict with generic summarization or analysis skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a well-structured workflow for a complex analytical task with clear sequencing and validation steps. Its main weakness is heavy dependence on an external rubric file (rules/output-sections.md) that isn't provided in the bundle, making the core deliverable—the thirteen sections—opaque. The actionability suffers from the abbreviated example and missing reference file, though the constraints and anti-patterns are usefully specific.
Suggestions
Include the rules/output-sections.md file in the bundle or inline the thirteen section headers with brief descriptions so the skill is self-contained enough to execute.
Expand the integrated example to show at least 2-3 actual section outputs (even abbreviated) so Claude has a concrete model of the expected format and depth.
Consider merging the 'Non-negotiables' constraints into the 'Process' steps where they apply, reducing duplication between the two sections.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Generally efficient and avoids explaining basic concepts, but some sections like 'Process' steps 1-6 and the anti-patterns list add moderate verbosity. Phrases like 'Every paragraph must earn its place' are somewhat meta. The content could be tightened, particularly the process section which partially restates the non-negotiables. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides specific constraints (300 words for section 8, exactly 10 actions in section 10, 3-5 comparands) which are concrete, but the actual execution depends entirely on the referenced rubric file (rules/output-sections.md) which is not provided. The integrated example is abbreviated to the point of being a sketch rather than executable guidance. No actual output example is shown. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The six-step process is clearly sequenced with logical ordering: clarify → load → classify → research → draft → self-check. The self-check step serves as an explicit validation checkpoint with specific criteria (headers match, word count band, item count). The process handles edge cases (huge sources, missing comparands, fragment-only inputs). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references rules/output-sections.md for the thirteen-section rubric, which is appropriate progressive disclosure. However, this bundle file is not provided, making it impossible to verify the reference works. The skill is somewhat monolithic with non-negotiables, process, example, and anti-patterns all inline, though for this length (~60 lines) it's borderline acceptable. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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