CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

comps-analysis

Build comparable-company valuation workbooks in Excel.

41

Quality

43%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./optional-skills/finance/comps-analysis/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

46%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 content is highly actionable with real formulas, commands, and a template layout, but it is severely over-long for a SKILL.md, repeats guidance across multiple sections, and is monolithic with missing bundle files it references. Workflow clarity is decent but lacks a validation checkpoint in the build sequence despite the destructive-regeneration context.

Suggestions

Split the body: keep a concise overview + quick-start and formulas in SKILL.md, and move the industry-specific metric lists, full template layout, and formulas reference into references/ files (the skill references examples/ and excel-author scripts that are absent — add them or remove the references).

Deduplicate: the MCP/data-source hierarchy appears in the early "CRITICAL" block, Section 4, and the trailing "Data sources" section — keep one authoritative version and link to it; similarly consolidate the repeated industry-metric tables in Sections 5, 6, and 9.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint to the Section 7 workflow (e.g. step 5.5: run `recalc.py` and confirm no #DIV/0!/#REF! before delivery) so the build sequence has the feedback loop the destructive-regeneration context requires.

Trim explanatory passages that restate what Claude already knows (definitions of quartiles/percentiles, why hardcoding is a silent bug) to raise conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

At ~650 lines the body is noticeably verbose: it re-explains concepts Claude already knows (what quartiles/percentiles mean, why hardcoding is bad, what EBITDA is), repeats the same industry-metric and statistics guidance across Sections 5, 6, 9, and 11, and duplicates the entire data-source/MCP guidance in both the early "CRITICAL" block and the trailing "Data sources" section, fitting the score-2 anchor of several padded, unnecessary sections.

2 / 5

Actionability

It provides concrete, executable guidance throughout — real Excel formulas (=MAX(B7:B9), =QUARTILE(B7:B9,3), =E7/C7), an openpyxl recalc command, cell-color hex codes, and a full ASCII template layout — with only minor gaps (formula examples use placeholder [Revenue] syntax rather than real cell refs in a couple of spots), matching the score-4 anchor of mostly executable guidance.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Section 7 lists a sequenced 6-step build process and the "CRITICAL" block mandates step-by-step user verification, but the build workflow lacks explicit validation checkpoints for the destructive/batch operation of regenerating the .xlsx (no "validate before delivery" step in the workflow despite the cap warning), and the recalc/validation command is mentioned only in passing in the Environment section, fitting the score-3 anchor of listed steps with validation gaps.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single monolithic 662-line SKILL.md with no references/, scripts/, or assets/ bundle and no signaling of one-level-deep files; it even references an `examples/comps_example.xlsx` and the `excel-author` skill's `scripts/recalc.py` that do not exist in this bundle, leaving that content inlined rather than split, matching the score-2 anchor of minimal structure with content that belongs in separate files inlined.

2 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

40%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 concise and names a clear niche, but it omits any "Use when" trigger guidance and under-specifies the concrete actions and natural keywords (comps, multiples, .xlsx) users would actually say. Per the rubric, the missing trigger clause caps completeness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when building a comps (comparable company) analysis, trading-multiples benchmark, or peer valuation in Excel (.xlsx)."

List 1-2 concrete actions to raise specificity, e.g. "compute operating metrics, valuation multiples, and quartile statistics."

Include natural synonyms users say ("comps", "comp set", "trading multiples", ".xlsx") to improve trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Build comparable-company valuation workbooks in Excel" names the domain and one concrete artifact (workbook) but lists no concrete actions like 'extract multiples', 'compute quartiles', or 'generate statistics', matching the score-2 anchor of minimal/generic actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

It states what the skill does ("Build comparable-company valuation workbooks") but has no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance; per the judging guidelines a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3, and here 'when' is entirely absent so it sits at 2.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms present ("comparable-company", "valuation", "Excel") but missing common variations and file extensions a user would actually say ("comps", "comp set", "trading multiples", ".xlsx"), fitting the score-3 anchor of relevant keywords with missing synonyms.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Comparable-company valuation workbooks in Excel" carves a clear niche distinct from a general Excel skill, with only minor overlap risk against sibling finance skills (DCF, LBO); not a 5 because "valuation workbooks" could still overlap with dcf-model/lbo-model peers.

4 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Validation

75%

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

Validation12 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (663 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

12

/

16

Passed

Repository
NousResearch/hermes-agent
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.