anki-card-creator

Use anki-card-creator for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries for study-card generation.

Quality

45%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/anki-card-creator/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

52%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 body is well-structured with a solid parameters table, sequenced workflow, verification commands, and a properly linked one-level-deep reference, but it is padded with generic/redundant boilerplate sections and lacks a concrete end-to-end card-generation example with a real command and expected output.

Suggestions

Remove or merge the redundant generic sections (Key Features, Implementation Details, Output Requirements, Response Template) to cut boilerplate that does not add skill-specific value.

Add a concrete end-to-end example, e.g. `python scripts/main.py --drug --name metformin --mechanism "inhibits gluconeogenesis" --output cards.tsv` followed by the expected TSV output, so the core task is copy-paste executable.

Resolve the Dependencies/Prerequisites contradiction ("Declared in requirements.txt" vs. "No additional Python packages required") and keep dependency facts in one place.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~200-line body carries several generic/redundant sections — Key Features restating the description, Implementation Details, and overlapping Output Requirements + Response Template — that restate process philosophy Claude already knows rather than skill-specific detail, matching the "noticeably verbose with several unnecessary padded sections" anchor.	2 / 5
Actionability	A concrete Parameters table and the py_compile/--help commands give some executable guidance, but the Example section is just a lone "Q: What is the mechanism of metformin?" line with no actual generation command or expected output, leaving the core task incomplete.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 5-step Workflow has a clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (steps 2 and 5), verification commands, and an error-handling feedback loop, but the validation is partly implicit rather than a concrete validate-the-output command, leaving a minor gap below the anchor-5 example.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a well-sectioned overview with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep real reference (references/audit-reference.md) and the scripts/main.py entry point, but some generic content is inlined in SKILL.md that could be trimmed or split, a minor organization gap.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

37%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 dominated by generic workflow-style language ("structured execution, explicit assumptions, clear output boundaries") with only one concrete capability ("study-card generation") and no explicit user-facing trigger clause, weakening specificity, trigger terms, and completeness.

Suggestions

Lead with concrete actions the skill performs, e.g. "Generates Anki-importable TSV study cards from Q/A notes, drug summaries, and anatomy fields" instead of abstract workflow language.

Add an explicit "Use when…" clause with natural trigger phrases users say, such as "Use when creating Anki cards, flashcards, or spaced-repetition study sets from medical notes or lecture material."

Replace the generic "structured execution / explicit assumptions / clear output boundaries" boilerplate with domain-specific details (e.g. drug-card and anatomy-card modes) to reduce overlap with other academic-writing skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The only concrete action named is "study-card generation"; the surrounding phrases ("structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries") are generic process meta-language rather than actual capabilities, so actions are minimal/generic like the anchor-2 example.	2 / 5
Completeness	A vague "what" (study-card generation) and a weakly-implied "when" (for academic writing workflows needing structure) are present, but there is no explicit "Use when…" trigger clause, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"study-card generation" and "academic writing workflows" are relevant keywords, but the description omits the natural phrases users actually say ("Anki cards", "flashcards", "spaced repetition"), matching the anchor where one or two generic keywords are present but natural phrases are missing.	2 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"study-card generation" gives a clear niche, but the boilerplate wrapper ("academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries") could overlap with many structured academic-writing skills, so it is only somewhat specific.	3 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: aipoch/medical-research-skills
Path: scientific-skills/Academic Writing/anki-card-creator/SKILL.md
Commit: 63c61d3

Reviewed: 3 hours 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.