Name: deep-research
Rating: 56.00000000000001 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

Blog Docs Log in Get started

deep-research

Run autonomous research tasks that plan, search, read, and synthesize information into comprehensive reports.

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/deep-research/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is deep-research in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

65%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 well-structured and actionable with strong command examples, but it relies on bundle files (scripts/research.py, requirements.txt) that are not present, weakening executability and progressive disclosure. Workflow clarity is adequate but lacks explicit validation and error-recovery checkpoints.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced bundle files (scripts/research.py and requirements.txt) or remove the references so the skill is self-contained and executable.

Add explicit validation/error-recovery checkpoints to the Workflow section, e.g., what to do when --status shows a failure or the API times out.

Deduplicate 'Best Use Cases' and 'Workflow' against 'When to Use This Skill' to tighten the body and remove redundant tokens.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with command examples and minimal prose, though 'Best Use Cases' and 'Workflow' repeat material already covered in 'When to Use This Skill', adding modest padding.	4 / 5
Actionability	It provides many concrete, copy-pasteable commands covering common cases, but references scripts/research.py and requirements.txt that are absent from the bundle, so the guidance is not fully executable as shipped.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear five-step sequence is present (query, estimate time, monitor, return, continue), but validation/error-recovery checkpoints for status polling and API failures are only implicit and not detailed.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The file is well-organized with clear section headers and no nested references, but it points to scripts/research.py and requirements.txt that do not exist in the bundle, so the references are not real one-level-deep pointers.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

63%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 specific and action-oriented but omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which limits its completeness. It is a solid niche description that could be improved by adding concrete trigger phrases users would naturally say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing natural trigger phrases (e.g., market analysis, competitive landscaping, literature reviews, due diligence).

Include synonyms and concrete nouns users would say ('research report', 'cite sources', 'compare products') to improve trigger term coverage.

Mirror the body's 'Best Use Cases' examples into the description so the frontmatter alone signals when to invoke.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description enumerates multiple concrete actions ('plan, search, read, and synthesize information into comprehensive reports') with a clear object, giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill does.	5 / 5
Completeness	There is a clear 'what' but no 'Use when...' or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so per the rubric guideline completeness is capped at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes several relevant keywords ('research tasks', 'comprehensive reports') but lacks the natural user phrases (market analysis, literature review, due diligence) that appear only in the body, and missing synonyms.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Autonomous research tasks ... comprehensive reports' carves a fairly distinct niche with minimal overlap, though it could overlap with a generic web-search skill.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 8 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/deep-research/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 3 days 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.