skill-quality-reviewer

This skill should be used when the user asks to "analyze skill quality", "evaluate this skill", "review skill quality", "check my skill", or "generate quality report". Evaluates local skills across description quality, content organization, writing style, and structural integrity.

Quality

88%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

High

Do not use without reviewing

Quality

Content

77%

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-organized and actionable with a clear sequenced workflow and real supporting scripts/references, but it is verbose and keeps substantial material inline that would be better split into references, slightly undercutting token efficiency and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Move the full Quality Report and Improvement Plan output templates into references/ (e.g., the existing references/batch-review-template.md) and reference them from the body, trimming roughly 80 lines from SKILL.md.

Remove or relocate the 'Grade Benchmarks', 'Common Quality Issues', and four 'Usage Examples' sections to references/examples-good.md or a dedicated doc, since they restate concepts Claude already knows.

De-duplicate the per-dimension scoring tables against references/scoring-criteria.md, keeping only a brief pointer in the body to avoid maintaining two copies of the rubric.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is well-structured but verbose — the full report/improvement templates (~86 lines), letter-grade benchmark tables, best-practices lists, and four illustrative usage examples add length that could be tightened or moved to references, matching 'mostly efficient but could be tightened'.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides concrete executable guidance: a bash command, the weighted-score formula, references to real scripts (extract-yaml.sh, skill-audit.py), and copy-paste-ready output templates, satisfying the actionable anchor for an instruction-only skill.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	An eight-step numbered workflow is clearly sequenced with validation checklists in Step 1 ('Validate:') and 'Check for:' lists throughout; as a read-only review it needs no destructive retry loop, so the cap does not apply.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References are well-signaled and one-level-deep and all referenced files exist, but large content that should be separate is inlined (output templates, grade benchmarks, usage examples), scoring tables duplicate references/scoring-criteria.md, and references/batch-review-template.md is an unreferenced bundle file.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

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.

The description is strong: it uses third-person framing, lists five natural trigger phrases, and explicitly covers both the 'what' (four named evaluation dimensions) and the 'when'. It is a clear, distinctive, well-targeted trigger description.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description enumerates concrete evaluation dimensions — 'description quality, content organization, writing style, and structural integrity' — listing multiple specific actions rather than vague language, matching the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what ('Evaluates local skills across...') and when ('This skill should be used when the user asks to...') with explicit triggers, satisfying the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It provides five natural trigger phrases a user would actually say — 'analyze skill quality', 'evaluate this skill', 'review skill quality', 'check my skill', 'generate quality report' — giving good coverage of natural terms.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The skill-quality-review niche with distinct triggers like 'evaluate this skill' and 'generate quality report' is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the clear-niche anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 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/skill-quality-reviewer/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.