pdf-verification-cli

Verify PDF page count and content using command-line tools when Python libraries unavailable

Quality

72%

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 ./benchmarks/gdpval/skills/pdf-verification-cli/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

82%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 a well-structured, highly actionable guide with executable bash and Python examples, a clear verification workflow with validation, and useful troubleshooting. Minor conciseness and organization trims would push it toward top scores.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is efficient with executable examples throughout, though the Key metadata fields list and the duplicated Common Use Cases table are minor over-explanation that could be trimmed, fitting anchor 4 over the lean anchor 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready bash and Python examples covering page count, text extraction, content verification, and install commands, fully matching anchor 5 for fully executable guidance covering the common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The four-step Verification Workflow has a clear sequence with an explicit page-count validation checkpoint (if/else with check/cross marks) and a Troubleshooting feedback section, but the install-then-retry loop is implicit, fitting anchor 4 over anchor 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized into clear, navigable sections and is self-contained with no external files needed, but everything is inline with no progressive file structure and the skill exceeds 50 lines, so the simple-skill exception does not reach anchor 5.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 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 clearly communicates a PDF-verification fallback using command-line tools and includes an explicit (if narrow) trigger condition. It is reasonably specific and distinct but lacks broader natural trigger terms and synonyms.

Suggestions

List several concrete actions explicitly (e.g., "count pages, extract text, search for keywords, check metadata") to raise specificity toward anchor 4.

Add natural trigger phrases and synonyms users would say, such as "Use when verifying PDFs, checking .pdf page counts, or inspecting document content," to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Reframe the when clause as a positive, general trigger (e.g., "Use when verifying PDF files") in addition to the Python-unavailable condition.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Verify PDF page count and content" names the PDF domain and two concrete actions (page count, content verification) but does not enumerate several specific operations, matching anchor 3 rather than anchor 4 which requires multiple specific actions.	3 / 5
Completeness	"Verify PDF page count and content using command-line tools" states the what clearly and "when Python libraries unavailable" provides explicit trigger guidance, but the when is a narrow condition rather than broad natural triggers, so anchor 4 fits better than anchor 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes "PDF page count and content" and "command-line tools" but lacks common synonyms and file extensions such as "PDFs", ".pdf", or "document", fitting anchor 3 (relevant keywords, missing common variations) more than anchor 4.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The CLI-fallback framing ("using command-line tools when Python libraries unavailable") gives a mostly-distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against general PDF skills, matching anchor 4 rather than the fully-distinct anchor 5.	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/pdf-verification-cli/SKILL.md
Commit: 3827781

Reviewed: 10 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.