inno-paper-writing

Creates formal academic research papers following IEEE/ACM formatting standards with proper structure, citations, and scholarly writing style. Use when the user asks to write a research paper, academic paper, or conference paper on any topic.

Quality

83%

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

Quality

Content

77%

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

The body is actionable with concrete templates, formatting specs, and a well-sequenced workflow including a verification feedback loop. Its main weaknesses are verbosity from restating general academic-writing knowledge and broken/duplicated formatting references that undermine progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Remove the detailed IEEE/ACM formatting dimensions from the body and point to the existing references/ specs files instead, eliminating duplication and shrinking token usage.

Fix or remove the assets/ PDF references (full_paper_template.pdf, interim-layout.pdf) since no assets/ directory exists, or add the missing files.

Trim the 'Academic Writing Style' section to only conventions that are non-obvious or skill-specific, cutting general guidance like 'Define all acronyms on first use' that Claude already applies.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is well organized but lengthy, and the 'Academic Writing Style' and paper-structure sections restate general scholarly conventions Claude already knows (e.g., 'Define all acronyms on first use', 'Present data clearly in tables/figures'), so it could be tightened toward the lean score-3 bar.	2 / 3
Actionability	For an instruction-only skill it provides concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance: IEEE citation format templates with examples, exact formatting dimensions, an explicit section-by-section drafting order, and a step-by-step citation-verification procedure with WebSearch actions.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The content-generation process is clearly sequenced (outline -> draft iteratively -> add citations -> review), and the citation-verification section includes an explicit 'Iterate until clean' feedback loop with a report-back checkpoint, satisfying the validation-checkpoint requirement.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	A Resources section clearly signals the three reference files (which exist), but the body also references two assets/ PDFs that do not exist, and detailed IEEE/ACM formatting specs are duplicated inline when they already live in separate reference files, fitting the score-2 anchor of content that should be separate being inline.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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 strong, clearly stating both the capability and explicit trigger conditions with natural user-facing terms. Its only weakness is that it describes one primary action with quality modifiers rather than enumerating several concrete operations.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain clearly ('formal academic research papers following IEEE/ACM formatting standards') and lists several qualities ('proper structure, citations, and scholarly writing style'), but the core action is singular ('Creates') with modifier attributes rather than multiple distinct concrete actions, so it does not reach the score-3 bar of listing several specific actions.	2 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what ('Creates formal academic research papers following IEEE/ACM formatting standards...') and when ('Use when the user asks to write a research paper, academic paper, or conference paper...'), with an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'research paper', 'academic paper', and 'conference paper' are natural phrases users would actually say when requesting this skill, giving good coverage of likely trigger terms.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The IEEE/ACM formal-paper niche with academic/conference-paper triggers is a distinct, clearly bounded scope unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, despite the slightly broad 'on any topic' qualifier.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 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: OpenLAIR/dr-claw
Path: skills/inno-paper-writing/SKILL.md
Commit: 6da7f7c

Reviewed: about 8 hours 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.