CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

rebuttal

Use when a quest already has a paper, draft, or review package and the task is to map reviewer feedback into experiments, manuscript deltas, and a durable rebuttal / revision response.

69

Quality

85%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%

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

The body is a thorough, highly actionable orchestration skill with a clear sequenced workflow, explicit validation checkpoints, and well-organized one-level-deep template references. Its main weakness is conciseness, as several rules and the analysis-before-execution stance are restated repeatedly.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated 'analysis before execution / do not jump to experiments' guidance into a single authoritative statement to reduce length without losing the rule.

De-duplicate the non-negotiable rules against the later workflow sections so each constraint appears once, with the workflow referencing it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and free of general-knowledge padding, but the 'analysis before execution' theme and several non-negotiable rules are restated multiple times and could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete throughout: stable id format (R1-C1), explicit route enums, exact artifact paths, named tool calls (artifact.record_analysis_slice, memory.list_recent(scope='quest', limit=5)), and a required field list for experimental items; as an instruction-only skill, absence of executable code is not penalized.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 6-step workflow with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops after each slice and before finalizing (e.g., 'Do not finalize... while reviewer-critical rows remain unresolved without an explicit blocker note').

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Reusable scaffolds are split into well-signaled, one-level-deep template files in references/ (review-matrix, action-plan, response-letter, evidence-update), all of which exist on disk; navigation is explicit.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

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, complete, and distinct, with an explicit trigger clause and clear niche. Its weakest point is trigger-term coverage, which omits common layperson phrasings a user might actually say.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger terms to include natural user phrasings such as 'reviewer comments', 'revise the paper', or 'write a rebuttal letter' so the description matches what users actually say.

Consider adding a brief mention of the response-letter output to make the concrete deliverable even more legible at a glance.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'map reviewer feedback into experiments, manuscript deltas, and a durable rebuttal / revision response' — matching the multiple-specific-actions anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

An explicit 'Use when...' clause states both the precondition (quest already has a paper/draft/review package) and the task (mapping feedback into experiments, deltas, and response), satisfying what and when.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Domain terms like 'review package', 'rebuttal', and 'revision response' are relevant but common user phrasings such as 'reviewer comments' or 'revise paper' are absent, so coverage is partial.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'already has a paper... review package' gating carves a clear rebuttal/revision niche distinct from ordinary drafting, making conflict with other skills unlikely.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
ResearAI/DeepScientist
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.