obsidian-project-kb-core

Use this as the main Claude Scholar skill for a vault-first, project-scoped Obsidian research knowledge base rooted at Research/{project-slug}/. It owns bootstrap, routing, daily logging, hub/plan/index maintenance, registry updates, lifecycle actions, and lint orchestration.

Quality

61%

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 ./skills/obsidian-project-kb-core/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%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 content is well-structured and lean with excellent progressive disclosure via real one-level-deep references, but it falls short on actionability (no invocation syntax) and workflow clarity (no sequenced validation checkpoints for destructive operations). Adding example script commands and an explicit validate-then-proceed flow would raise both.

Suggestions

Add concrete invocation examples for the helper scripts (e.g., 'python scripts/kb_scaffold.py Research/{slug}', 'python scripts/kb_lint.py Research/{slug}') so guidance is copy-paste ready.

Include an explicit validation checkpoint in the workflow for destructive/batch lifecycle actions (validate -> fix -> re-run lint -> only then proceed), e.g. a short ordered bootstrap/routing sequence.

De-duplicate the default structure listing by summarizing it in SKILL.md and pointing to references/DIRECTORY-SCHEMA.md for the authoritative schema.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and free of concept-padding, assuming Claude's competence; the only minor trim opportunity is the default structure listing duplicated in references/DIRECTORY-SCHEMA.md.	4 / 5
Actionability	It names the helper scripts and their purposes ('scaffold', 'registry consistency', 'link checks') but gives no invocation syntax or example commands, leaving the guidance concrete yet incomplete.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Responsibilities are listed but not sequenced as a workflow, and destructive/batch operations (purge, archive, promote, link repair) lack explicit validate->fix->retry checkpoints, capping this dimension at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a clear overview with a well-signaled, one-level-deep 'Read next' list of seven real reference files plus named scripts, making navigation easy and keeping detail out of the main file.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

58%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 specific and distinctive, clearly scoping a project-scoped Obsidian research KB with a concrete action list, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and natural-synonym keyword coverage. Adding trigger phrases would lift completeness and trigger_term_quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete user triggers (e.g., 'Use when the user wants to organize, log, or maintain project-scoped Obsidian research notes under Research/{project-slug}/').

Add natural keyword variations a user would say, such as 'Obsidian vault', 'literature notes', 'research notes', or 'project knowledge base', to improve trigger term coverage.

Tighten abstract action phrases like 'lifecycle actions' into concrete verbs (create, update, rename, archive, purge, promote) already named in the body.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and lists multiple concrete actions ('bootstrap, routing, daily logging, hub/plan/index maintenance, registry updates, lifecycle actions, and lint orchestration'), though a few remain abstract like 'lifecycle actions', leaving minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does but provides no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the rubric guideline completeness is capped at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes relevant domain keywords ('Obsidian', 'research knowledge base', 'vault-first', 'project-scoped') but misses common natural variations or synonyms a user might actually say, so it is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is clearly specified ('vault-first, project-scoped Obsidian research knowledge base rooted at Research/{project-slug}/'), giving minimal conflict risk with only minor overlap against related note-taking skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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: Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar
Path: skills/obsidian-project-kb-core/SKILL.md
Commit: 6ed46da

Reviewed: 8 days 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.