pandoc-pdf-error-resolution

Systematic debugging workflow for pandoc PDF conversion errors

Quality

71%

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 ./benchmarks/gdpval/skills/pandoc-pdf-error-resolution/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%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 a well-structured, actionable debugging workflow with concrete commands and a clear sequence, but it is held back by a redundant example script and mild over-explanation that could be trimmed.

Suggestions

Remove or compress the 'Example Complete Workflow' script since it restates steps 1-3, or move it to a scripts/ file and reference it from the body to improve both conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Trim concept explanations Claude already knows (e.g., 'pandoc itself doesn't generate PDFs directly—it delegates to external PDF engines') to lift conciseness.

Add explicit per-step validation/feedback (e.g., 'If Step 2 finds no engines, install one before proceeding') to push workflow clarity toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly concrete commands, but the 'Example Complete Workflow' script duplicates steps 1-3 and prose like 'pandoc itself doesn't generate PDFs directly—it delegates to external PDF engines' mildly over-explains, fitting anchor 3 ('Mostly efficient but could be tightened').	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides many copy-paste-ready bash commands and a full executable script covering common cases, with only minor gaps like the '<package-name>' placeholder and example filenames, fitting anchor 4 ('Mostly executable guidance; minor gaps').	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Six clearly sequenced steps with stderr capture (Step 4) and an exit-code feedback loop in the script give a clear sequence with most checkpoints present; validation is not woven into each step, so anchor 4 fits over 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized sections (When to Use, numbered steps, Quick Reference table) with no bundle files; the 35-line inline example script could be split into a separate file, fitting anchor 4 ('Good structure; minor organization gaps') rather than 5 since no references are used and the skill exceeds 50 lines.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

61%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, naming a clear niche and natural trigger terms, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness and limits trigger guidance.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when pandoc fails with an unknown error during PDF conversion or when PDF generation fails but other formats succeed.'

Broaden trigger terms with synonyms users might say, such as 'PDF generation', 'PDF export', or 'LaTeX engine errors'.

Spell out 1-2 concrete actions beyond 'debugging' (e.g., 'diagnose engine availability, capture stderr, install missing LaTeX packages') to lift specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names a concrete domain ('pandoc PDF conversion errors') and one action ('debugging workflow'), matching anchor 3 ('Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions'); it is more concrete than the generic anchor 2 example.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear ('systematic debugging workflow for pandoc PDF conversion errors') but there is no 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the guidelines completeness is capped at 3 with 'when' only weakly implied.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms 'pandoc', 'PDF', and 'conversion errors' align with what a user would say, giving good keyword coverage, though synonyms like 'PDF generation/export' and file extensions are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'pandoc PDF conversion errors' is a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, but a general pandoc or general PDF-debugging skill could still overlap, fitting anchor 4 ('Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk').	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: HKUDS/OpenSpace
Path: benchmarks/gdpval/skills/pandoc-pdf-error-resolution/SKILL.md
Commit: 3827781

Reviewed: 9 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.