writer-memory
Agentic memory system for writers - track characters, relationships, scenes, and themes
34
30%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/writer-memory/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%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 identifies a clear domain (creative writing memory management) and lists key entities it tracks, but falls short on actionable specificity and completely lacks explicit trigger guidance. It reads more like a tagline than a functional description that would help Claude reliably select this skill from a large pool of options.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user is writing fiction and needs to track or recall character details, plot threads, story arcs, or world-building elements.'
Expand the action verbs beyond 'track' to describe concrete capabilities, e.g., 'Creates and updates character profiles, maps relationship networks, maintains scene timelines, and surfaces relevant story context during writing sessions.'
Include additional natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'novel', 'story', 'fiction', 'plot', 'worldbuilding', 'character sheet', or 'story bible'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (writing/memory system) and lists some specific entities it tracks (characters, relationships, scenes, themes), but doesn't describe concrete actions beyond 'track'. What does tracking entail? Creating, updating, querying, linking? | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (tracks characters, relationships, scenes, themes) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also only partially described, warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'characters', 'relationships', 'scenes', 'themes', and 'writers' that users might mention. However, it misses common variations like 'novel', 'story', 'worldbuilding', 'plot', 'character sheet', 'story bible', or 'fiction'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of 'agentic memory system' and 'writers' creates a somewhat distinct niche, but 'memory system' is vague enough to overlap with general note-taking or knowledge management skills. The writing-specific terms help but aren't sufficient to fully distinguish it. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
27%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is comprehensive documentation of a writer memory system but suffers from extreme verbosity — it reads like a full product manual rather than a concise skill file. The content explains every field, provides full JSON schemas, and includes extensive examples that could be split into reference files. While the command interface is well-defined and the Korean-first creative writing focus is unique, the lack of actual implementation code and the monolithic structure significantly reduce its effectiveness as a skill.
Suggestions
Reduce the SKILL.md to a concise overview (~80-100 lines) covering core commands, one brief example workflow, and key behavioral notes — move the full JSON schema, memory type field tables, and detailed examples into separate reference files like SCHEMA.md, MEMORY_TYPES.md, and EXAMPLES.md.
Add explicit validation checkpoints in the workflow (e.g., 'After adding characters, run `/writer-memory status` to verify they were stored correctly before proceeding to relationships').
Remove redundant explanations — the synopsis 5 elements section, for instance, repeats information that could be a simple list with one-line descriptions rather than multi-line blocks with examples for each.
Provide or reference actual implementation scripts/code that power the commands, since currently the skill describes a system without showing how it works under the hood.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. Exhaustively documents every field, every memory type, full JSON schema, complete example outputs, troubleshooting, and tips — most of which Claude can infer or generate from a concise specification. The Korean terminology tables, synopsis elements, and validation details could be dramatically condensed. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Commands are clearly listed with examples and expected outputs, which is good. However, there's no actual executable code — the commands reference a system (`/oh-my-claudecode:writer-memory`) but no implementation scripts or code are provided. The skill describes what should happen but doesn't show how it's implemented (no bundle files, no scripts). It reads more like API documentation than actionable instructions. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The full workflow example provides a clear sequence of commands, and the validation pipeline describes what gets checked. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints or error recovery steps in the workflow itself — the troubleshooting section is separate and generic. For a system that modifies persistent JSON state, there should be validation steps integrated into the workflow (e.g., verify memory.json after updates). | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Everything is in a single monolithic file with no references to external files despite the content being long enough to warrant splitting. The full JSON schema, all memory type details, synopsis elements, validation rules, and examples are all inline. With no bundle files provided, there's no external structure to support this — but the content itself should have been organized into separate reference files (e.g., SCHEMA.md, EXAMPLES.md, MEMORY_TYPES.md). | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode
- Commit
3e94567
- 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.