CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

verification

Use when about to claim work is complete, a chapter is finished, or references are verified - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims

73

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A clear, actionable verification skill with a well-sequenced gating workflow and concrete commands; the only weakness is mild redundancy between the Red Flags and 借口/事实 sections.

Suggestions

Consolidate the 'Red Flags - 停止' list and the '借口与事实' table — they overlap heavily and could be merged into one section to save tokens.

Consider trimming the '为什么这很重要' rationale, which explains consequences Claude can already infer from the failure cases listed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient with lean tables and code blocks, but the '借口与事实' table overlaps the 'Red Flags' list and could be tightened; some redundancy across sections.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides fully executable commands (e.g. powershell -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -File scripts/check_skill_integrity.ps1, CrossRef API checks) and concrete copy-paste-ready examples.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 验证门控 sequence (确认→执行→读取→验证→声称) gives an explicit ordered workflow with a validation checkpoint and error-recovery branch ('如果否/如果是').

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist; the body is a single-purpose skill with well-organized sections (核心原则, 验证门控, 场景, Red Flags, 检查清单) that are easy to navigate.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 concise, uses third-person voice, and cleanly answers both what the skill does and when to invoke it with natural trigger phrases.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions ('claim work is complete, a chapter is finished, or references are verified', 'running verification commands and confirming output') rather than vague language.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicit 'Use when...' clause covers the trigger, and the action (require verification commands and confirm output) answers what it does; both what and when are present.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say — 'claim work is complete', 'chapter is finished', 'references are verified', 'success claims' — giving good coverage of common variations.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (verification-before-success-claims) with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 4 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
Norman-bury/research-writing-skill
Reviewed

Table of Contents

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.