A tight, well-sequenced instruction skill that is token-efficient and assumes Claude's competence. Its weaknesses are a dangling AGENTS.md template reference, the lack of a worked example, and the absence of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop.

Suggestions

Provide a short worked example (a sample claim + <=25-word quote + path triple) so the Extract step is unambiguous.

Make the AGENTS.md template reference concrete by either bundling the template or inlining its structure, and add a validate->fix->re-check feedback loop to the Self-check step.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a lean ~30-line playbook with no concept-explanation padding, no library recommendations, and no fluff; it assumes Claude's competence and every step earns its place.	5 / 5
Actionability	It names concrete tools (list_files/read_file/grep_files) and a specific extraction format (claim + quote <=25 words + file path), but the referenced AGENTS.md template is not bundled and no worked examples are provided.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Six steps are clearly sequenced (Inventory through Self-check) with an explicit validation checkpoint (remove unsupported sentences), but there is no error-recovery feedback loop or checklist.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A simple, well-sectioned skill (When to use / Steps / Output) with good structure, but the AGENTS.md reference is one level deep yet not present in the bundle and not clearly signaled as a bundle link.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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.

A concise, third-person description that clearly names its domain and surfaces natural trigger terms for several use cases. Its main gap is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and a broader list of concrete actions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when the user asks for a summary, briefing, literature review, or comparison of source files.'

List one or two more concrete actions (e.g., 'extracts claims with citations', 'groups findings by theme') to lift specificity above a single action.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('citation-grounded summary across one or more workspace source files') and one concrete action ('Produces... summary'), but does not list several specific actions, matching the '1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor.	3 / 5
Completeness	It states both what (produces a citation-grounded summary) and when (for summaries, briefings, literature reviews, or comparisons), but the 'when' is phrased as output purposes rather than an explicit 'Use when the user asks for...' trigger.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'summaries, briefings, literature reviews, or comparisons' are natural terms users would say with good coverage, but synonyms and file extensions are absent, so it falls short of comprehensive (5).	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'citation-grounded summary across workspace source files' carves a mostly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against generic summarization skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 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: agentscope-ai/agentscope-java
Path: agentscope-examples/agents/agentscope-paw/src/main/resources/templates/research-assistant/skills/synthesize-report/SKILL.md
Commit: 9e43ed8

Reviewed: 2 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.