robust-pdf-extraction

Multi-method PDF extraction with sequential fallback and OCR for scanned documents

Quality

60%

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/robust-pdf-extraction/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 body delivers executable, well-sequenced guidance with real validation and fallback loops, but is held back by a copy-paste import bug in the secondary method and redundancy between the step-by-step functions and the consolidated workflow function.

Suggestions

Fix the pypdfium2 import: change `import pdfium2` and `pdfium2.PdfDocument` to `import pypdfium2` and `pypdfium2.PdfDocument` so the secondary method runs as written.

Eliminate redundancy by either referencing the per-step functions from the complete workflow instead of re-listing them, or dropping the standalone function blocks in favor of the consolidated workflow.

Trim the restated opening paragraph and obvious docstrings (e.g., "Check if extracted text is meaningful") to assume Claude's competence and improve token efficiency.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly functional code with brief intros, but the "Complete Workflow Function" recombines the per-step functions already shown, and the opening paragraph plus several docstrings/comments restate the description; it could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Each method ships as a complete, copy-pasteable Python function with a unifying workflow function and install commands, but the secondary method uses `import pdfium2` / `pdfium2.PdfDocument` when the real package is `pypdfium2`, so that block is not executable as written.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1-6 are clearly sequenced with an explicit validation checkpoint (`is_meaningful_text`) after each attempt and feedback loops via try/except plus OCR fallback; falls short of 5 because there is no formal checklist or error-recovery guidance beyond continuing to the next method.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized into clearly headed sections (When to Use, Workflow Steps, Complete Workflow Function, Dependencies, Best Practices, Troubleshooting) with no nested or buried references; the main gap is the redundancy between the per-step functions and the complete workflow function.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 distinguishes the skill well, but it omits any explicit "when to use" trigger guidance and lacks common natural trigger terms, capping completeness and trigger-term quality at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add a "Use when..." clause naming concrete triggers (e.g., 'Use when extracting text from PDFs of unknown type, including scanned/image PDFs, or when a single extraction method may fail').

Include natural trigger terms and synonyms users actually say — "PDFs", "PDF files", ".pdf", "text extraction" — alongside the existing "PDF extraction" and "OCR".

Mention the distinction between text-based and scanned PDFs explicitly to sharpen specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Multi-method PDF extraction with sequential fallback and OCR for scanned documents" names the domain plus 2-3 concrete actions (multi-method extraction, sequential fallback, OCR), but coverage is not comprehensive — it omits text-based vs scanned distinction and the specific methods used.	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear (multi-method PDF extraction with fallback and OCR), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Phrases like "PDF extraction", "OCR", and "scanned documents" are relevant, but common natural variations users say ("PDFs", "text extraction", ".pdf", "PDF files") are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is fairly distinct (robust PDF extraction with sequential fallback + OCR) with minor overlap risk only against other PDF-handling skills; it would not trigger for unrelated skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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/robust-pdf-extraction/SKILL.md
Commit: 3827781

Reviewed: 7 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.