write-concisely

Apply writing rules to any documentation that humans will read. Makes your writing clearer, stronger, and more professional.

Quality

35%

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 ./plugins/docs/skills/write-concisely/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

25%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 skill body is essentially a verbatim reproduction of a public-domain style manual with a thin summary header, which violates conciseness and progressive-disclosure principles badly. The examples are concrete but there is no workflow or file structure to make the material operationally usable.

Suggestions

Replace the inlined book with a concise overview plus one-level-deep references, e.g. move the full rules to references/RULES.md and the word-usage glossary to references/USAGE.md, keeping only a quick-start summary in SKILL.md.

Add a short workflow: how to identify which rules apply, apply edits, and verify meaning is preserved (a validate->fix->retry loop), instead of the single broken instruction line.

Cut explanatory prose Claude already knows and keep only the Original/Revision tables and rule statements that earn their tokens.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body reproduces the entire ~1044-line text of Strunk's The Elements of Style verbatim, extensively restating well-known style concepts Claude already knows; this is the anchor case of a heavily padded wall of reference material.	1 / 5
Actionability	Concrete Original/Revision example tables give specific before/after guidance, but the body is a raw reference dump with no procedure telling Claude which rules to apply when or how to act on them, leaving key operational details missing.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is no real workflow: the only guidance is the broken one-liner "Apply these rules to task that requested by user," with no sequencing, rule-selection logic, or validation that edits preserve meaning.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The entire book is inlined into SKILL.md with only section headers; ~1000 lines of reference material that clearly belongs in separate files (e.g. RULES.md, USAGE_GLOSSARY.md) are not split out, and no bundle files exist.	2 / 5
	Total	8 / 20 Passed

Description

45%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 states a clear purpose but is generic, lacks concrete named actions, and provides no explicit "Use when..." trigger guidance. It is functional but below the bar set by the strong reference examples.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions, e.g. "Tightens prose, fixes passive voice, removes needless words, and applies Strunk's style rules to documentation, READMEs, and reports."

Append an explicit trigger clause such as "Use when the user asks to edit, proofread, tighten, or polish documentation that humans will read."

Include common natural synonyms users say (proofread, rewrite, fix grammar, make it concise) to improve trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Apply writing rules" names the domain but is a single generic action, and "Makes your writing clearer, stronger, and more professional" describes outcomes rather than concrete actions; it does not list several specific operations.	2 / 5
Completeness	It has a clear "what" (apply writing rules to human-readable documentation) but no "Use when..." trigger clause, so the "when" is only weakly implied; per the guideline a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes relevant natural terms like "documentation," "writing," "clearer," and "more professional," but misses common variations users actually say such as "proofread," "edit my doc," "fix my grammar," "concise," or "rewrite."	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Writing rules / documentation that humans will read" is a somewhat specific niche but is broad enough to overlap with general editing, proofreading, or grammar-fixing skills.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (1045 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
Path: plugins/docs/skills/write-concisely/SKILL.md
Commit: 8539779

Reviewed: 4 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.