pdf-checklist-generator

Generate structured PDF checklists and reports with tables, sections, and scoring criteria using Python libraries

Quality

68%

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/pdf-checklist-generator/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

75%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 body is highly actionable with multiple complete executable templates and a clear sequenced workflow including verification, but it is somewhat verbose due to repeated near-identical code examples and lacks an error-recovery loop.

Suggestions

Consolidate the redundant reportlab table examples (Template A, Template C, Common Patterns, and the final Example Complete Workflow) into one canonical example plus targeted variants.

Add an explicit verification feedback loop — e.g., 'If the PDF is missing or unreadable, check ARTIFACT_PATH and re-run' — to lift workflow clarity.

Move the secondary Common Patterns and Troubleshooting material into a reference file (or trim) to reduce inline length now that the core templates are self-contained.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but it repeats the same reportlab table-building pattern across Template A, Template C, the Common Patterns, and a final Example Complete Workflow, which could be consolidated.	3 / 5
Actionability	Three complete, copy-paste-ready templates (reportlab, fpdf2, scorecard) plus reusable patterns cover the common cases with fully executable code and explicit ARTIFACT_PATH output.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear four-step sequence (Plan → Write → ARTIFACT_PATH → Verify) includes a verification checkpoint, but it lacks an explicit error-recovery feedback loop if verification fails.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is organized under clear section headers with material reasonably placed, and no bundle files exist to reference; the main gap is minor redundancy that could be split or trimmed rather than a structural problem.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 conveys a clear, multi-faceted capability in the PDF-generation domain with decent natural keywords, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps completeness and limits distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete trigger situations (e.g., 'Use when generating PDF checklists, scorecards, or formatted reports in execute_code_sandbox').

Include natural synonyms and the file extension users actually say — '.pdf', 'scorecard', 'forms' — to broaden trigger coverage.

Differentiate from generic PDF skills by foregrounding the scoring-criteria/table angle as the distinctive niche.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the PDF domain and lists several concrete actions — 'checklists and reports with tables, sections, and scoring criteria' — giving good coverage, though all hang off a single 'Generate' verb rather than distinct operations.	4 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does but contains no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms like 'PDF', 'checklists', 'reports', 'tables', and 'scoring criteria' are present, but common synonyms/extensions such as '.pdf', 'scorecard', and 'forms' are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'structured PDF checklists and reports with scoring criteria' niche is somewhat specific, but it could still overlap with generic PDF-generation or report-building skills, and the missing trigger clause raises conflict risk.	3 / 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/pdf-checklist-generator/SKILL.md
Commit: 3827781

Reviewed: 13 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.