acme-research

Search and summarize material from the Acme research service.

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./examples/plugin-packages/acme-research/skills/acme-research/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

92%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 model of lean, actionable instruction: an exact tool-call specification, a clear citation requirement, explicit authorization-error handling, and security rules against leaking authorization values. The only notable gap is that the summarization half of the skill's purpose is never operationalized in the body.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The 14-line body is lean and efficient: an invocation line, one exact tool call, and handling rules, with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padding. Every token earns its place, matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Step 1 gives fully concrete, executable parameters ('ipollowork_extension_call', 'extensionId: "acme-research"', 'action: "search"', 'args: { "query": "..." }') and steps 2-4 are specific instructions. It falls short of 5 only because 'summarize' — a stated capability — has no guidance on output shape, leaving a minor gap.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The numbered sequence is clear and includes an explicit error-recovery branch for 'plugin_authorization_required' (direct the user to Settings → Extensions, never have them paste a key in chat). This single-purpose skill is unambiguous with a feedback path for its one failure mode, matching the top anchor under the simple-skill exception.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, with no external reference material needed; the body is a well-organized flat procedure with no buried references or nested files. Per the simple-skill scoring note, this earns a 5.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 concise and names a distinct, concrete niche (the Acme research service) with two clear actions. Its main weakness is the absence of any 'Use when...' trigger guidance and thin keyword coverage, which leaves a model to infer when the skill should activate. Adding a trigger clause with natural synonyms would raise completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to search, look up, or summarize material from the Acme research library.'

Add natural synonyms users would say, such as 'find papers', 'private research library', or 'literature lookup', to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Mention one more concrete capability from the body (e.g. citing returned document titles and source URLs) to improve specificity and distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ('Acme research service') and exactly two concrete actions ('Search and summarize'), matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage. It is not a 4 because no additional specific capabilities are listed, and not a 2 because the actions are concrete rather than generic processing.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated ('Search and summarize material from the Acme research service') but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not a 2 because the 'what' is concrete rather than vague.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'Search', 'summarize', and 'research' are relevant natural keywords, but common variations and synonyms users would say ('look up', 'find papers', 'literature', 'private library') are missing. It is above a 2 because the terms present are on-domain rather than generic, but below a 4 because coverage is thin.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Naming the proprietary 'Acme research service' gives a clear niche with only minor overlap risk against generic search/summarize skills. It is not a 5 because the description lacks distinct trigger phrasing that would firmly separate it from other research or search skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: Devin-AXIS/iPolloWork
Path: examples/plugin-packages/acme-research/skills/acme-research/SKILL.md
Commit: dada31d

Reviewed: 12 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.