research-ideation

This skill should be used when the user asks to "brainstorm research ideas", "use 5W1H framework", "identify research gaps", "conduct gap analysis", "start research project", "conduct literature review", "define research question", "select research method", "plan research", or mentions research project initiation phase. Provides comprehensive guidance for research startup workflow from idea generation to planning.

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/research-ideation/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill body is a well-structured overview that points to eight valid one-level reference files, with a clear workflow and an explicit readiness gate. Its main weaknesses are inline concept duplication, mostly descriptive feature bullets, an undescribed gate-failure recovery path, and two missing example-file references.

Suggestions

Resolve the broken example references: either add examples/example-literature-review.md and examples/example-research-proposal.md or remove the "Example Files" section, since the paths currently lead nowhere.

Move the inline 5W1H dimension enumeration and the gap-type/dimension lists out of SKILL.md (they duplicate the reference files and explain a framework Claude knows) to improve conciseness.

Add concrete error-recovery guidance for the Proposal Readiness Gate — what to do when evidence fails the gate (e.g., loop back to literature search / evidence gathering) — to strengthen workflow clarity and actionability.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly an efficient overview, but it inline-explains the 5W1H framework (What/Why/Who/When/Where/How) Claude already knows and restates the five gap types and five analysis dimensions that are duplicated in references/gap-analysis-guide.md, so it could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	Concrete anchors exist (Zotero MCP tool names with attach_pdf=true, the Research Question Card template, the readiness gate, gated conditional outputs), but the Core Features bullets are abstract descriptions ("Plan research timeline", "Identify potential risks") that describe rather than instruct, leaving actionable detail deferred to references.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear sequence is given ("Research interest → Idea brainstorming (5W1H) → Research Question Card → ... → Decision") with an explicit Proposal Readiness Gate and conditional-output gates, but no feedback loop describes what to do when the gate fails, so checkpoints are present yet error recovery is implicit.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The Reference Files section is well-organized and one-level-deep with eight real, described references, but the body also references examples/example-literature-review.md and examples/example-research-proposal.md, which do not exist in the bundle, so two signaled navigation paths are broken.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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 strong on triggers, completeness, and distinctiveness, with a clear initiation-phase niche and an explicit use-when clause. Its weakest point is specificity, where the capability statement uses abstract phrasing ("comprehensive guidance") rather than concrete verbs.

Suggestions

Replace "Provides comprehensive guidance" with concrete capability verbs (e.g. "Generates research question cards, runs gap analysis, and selects methods") to lift specificity.

Drop the over-claim hedge "comprehensive" and state the discrete deliverables the skill produces.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The capability clause "Provides comprehensive guidance for research startup workflow from idea generation to planning" names the domain and a couple of actions but leans on abstract phrasing ("comprehensive guidance") rather than enumerating concrete capabilities, so it sits at the names-domain-and-some-actions level rather than listing multiple specific actions.	2 / 3
Completeness	It answers both: an explicit "This skill should be used when the user asks to ..." trigger clause (the when) plus "Provides comprehensive guidance for research startup workflow from idea generation to planning" (the what), matching the both-what-and-when-with-explicit-triggers anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes a broad set of natural phrases a user would say — "brainstorm research ideas", "identify research gaps", "conduct literature review", "define research question", "select research method", "plan research" — giving good coverage of natural trigger terms.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The triggers are scoped to the research project initiation phase (idea generation, question definition, method selection, planning), carving a clear niche that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar
Path: skills/research-ideation/SKILL.md
Commit: 2f7766f

Reviewed: about 14 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.