writing-clearly-and-concisely
Apply Strunk's timeless writing rules to ANY prose humans will read—documentation, commit messages, error messages, explanations, reports, or UI text. Makes your writing clearer, stronger, and more professional.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:Dicklesworthstone/pi_agent_rust --skill writing-clearly-and-concisely66
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
32%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 identifies a clear domain (prose writing) and lists relevant content types, but lacks concrete action verbs describing what transformations it performs. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause significantly weakens its utility for skill selection, and the outcome-focused language ('clearer, stronger, more professional') is too vague to distinguish it from other writing-related skills.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger phrases like 'improve my writing', 'edit this text', 'make this clearer', 'writing style review'
Replace vague outcomes ('clearer, stronger') with specific actions: 'removes unnecessary words, converts passive to active voice, tightens sentence structure'
Include natural user phrases that would trigger this skill: 'proofread', 'polish this', 'writing feedback', 'too wordy'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (writing/prose) and mentions several content types (documentation, commit messages, error messages, etc.), but the actual actions are vague—'Apply rules' and 'Makes writing clearer' don't describe concrete operations like 'removes passive voice' or 'shortens sentences'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (applies Strunk's rules to prose) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance. The rubric states missing explicit trigger guidance should cap completeness at 2, and this has no when clause at all. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some useful terms users might say ('documentation', 'commit messages', 'error messages', 'UI text'), but misses natural trigger phrases like 'edit my writing', 'improve this text', 'make this clearer', 'writing style', or 'proofread'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The Strunk reference provides some distinctiveness, but 'makes writing clearer, stronger, and more professional' is generic enough to overlap with general editing, grammar checking, or other writing improvement skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 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-structured skill that efficiently points to a detailed reference while providing enough inline guidance for quick use. The token warning and subagent strategy are thoughtful additions. Main weakness is lack of concrete before/after examples showing the rules in action, which would make the skill more immediately actionable without requiring the full 12k token reference.
Suggestions
Add 2-3 brief before/after examples for the bolded rules (e.g., passive→active, wordy→concise) to make the skill actionable without loading the full reference
Provide a concrete subagent dispatch code snippet or prompt template for the limited context strategy
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely lean and efficient. No unnecessary explanations of what good writing is or why it matters—assumes Claude knows. The token warning and context strategy are practical additions that earn their place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides clear rule references and a subagent strategy, but lacks concrete examples of applying the rules. No before/after examples showing transformations, no specific code for the subagent dispatch pattern. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | For a simple skill, the workflow is clear: write draft → read guide → apply rules. The limited context strategy provides explicit 3-step sequence. No destructive operations requiring validation checkpoints. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with clear overview, explicit token cost warning, and single-level reference to elements-of-style.md. Content appropriately split between quick reference (inline rules) and detailed guide (external file). | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.