CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

writing-coach

Writing improvement specialist for grammar, style, clarity, and structure

55

Quality

61%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./crates/openfang-skills/bundled/writing-coach/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

72%

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

The body is lean, well-organized, and free of token waste, with concrete before/after examples throughout. Its main gap is the lack of an explicit, sequenced editing workflow with checkpoints, which leaves actionability and workflow clarity at the mid level.

Suggestions

Add a short sequenced workflow, e.g. '1. Read for structure and lead-with-main-point, 2. Tighten sentence-level clarity and filler, 3. Fix grammar/terminology, 4. Re-read once to verify meaning is preserved.'

Include a verification checkpoint such as 'After editing, confirm no factual meaning changed and the author's voice is intact' to add a feedback loop.

Optionally show one brief before/after paragraph example demonstrating the full applied process end-to-end.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is a tight bullet list with no padding, no library/tool explanations, and no conceptual bloat; each bullet is an actionable heuristic or a concrete do/don't pair, so every token earns its place.

3 / 3

Actionability

Concrete do/don't examples ('The team deployed the fix' not 'The fix was deployed'; 'latency dropped from 200ms to 50ms') are present, but the skill is a set of advisory principles rather than a copy-paste-ready procedure, matching 'some concrete guidance but incomplete'.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Sections are grouped by editing level (structural, sentence-level, technical), giving an implicit rough order, but there is no explicit sequenced workflow or validation checkpoint for a given writing task, fitting 'steps listed but validation gaps'.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external references, and is organized into clearly headed sections (Key Principles, Structural, Sentence-Level, Technical, Pitfalls), satisfying the simple-skills allowance for a top score on organization alone.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

50%

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 clear and uses third person with relevant natural keywords, but it states only what the skill does without any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should invoke it. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger terms would lift completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks to improve, edit, proofread, or tighten their writing (emails, docs, posts, or prose).'

Replace abstract area labels with concrete actions, e.g. 'rewrites sentences for clarity, fixes grammar, tightens structure, and adjusts tone'.

Add common user phrasings ('edit my draft', 'proofread', 'make this clearer') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Writing improvement specialist') and improvement areas ('grammar, style, clarity, and structure'), but lists categories rather than concrete actions like 'rewrite sentences' or 'fix grammar errors', matching the 'names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive' anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

It answers 'what' (writing improvement across four areas) but provides no 'Use when...' trigger or equivalent explicit 'when' guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like 'writing', 'grammar', 'style', and 'clarity' are natural things a user would say, but common variations such as 'proofread', 'edit', 'rewrite', or 'tone' are missing, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Writing coaching is a recognizable niche, but the description is broad enough to overlap with general editing or document-revision skills, matching 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills'.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
RightNow-AI/openfang
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.