CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

bib-formatter

Convert reference lists and in-text citations between RIS, BibTeX, plain text, and CSL-JSON, triggered when you need to unify bibliography/citation styles before journal submission or compare before/after formatting differences.

66

Quality

80%

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 ./scientific-skills/Other/bib-formatter/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 delivers executable examples and a well-sequenced, validated workflow that matches the bundled script. It would score higher with trimming of the generic boilerplate sections and an explicit link to the existing csl-styles reference.

Suggestions

Trim or collapse the generic boilerplate sections (When Not to Use, Output Contract, Failure Handling, User Checkpoints, Input/Quick Validation) into a short shared checklist, since they add length without bib-formatter-specific detail.

Explicitly link references/csl-styles.md from the Dependencies or Implementation Details section so users discover the bundled CSL acquisition guide.

Show how the mandatory Markdown Before/After comparison table is produced (script flag or post-step command) so the output contract is fully actionable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The core (Key Features, four examples, workflow) is efficient, but several appended boilerplate sections (When Not to Use, Required Inputs, Output Contract, Failure Handling, User Checkpoints, Input/Quick Validation) restate generic guidance that adds length without skill-specific value.

3 / 5

Actionability

Four copy-paste-ready bash invocations with flags that match the script's argparse, plus a concrete numbered workflow with real flag names; the only gap is that the mandatory Before/After comparison table is described as an output requirement but not tied to a concrete command.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-step sequence with an explicit validate/rerun feedback loop (step 4) and a quality checklist, satisfying the batch-operation validation requirement; just short of a 5 because the validation step is a manual completeness check rather than a hard automated gate tied to a script command.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized sections with one-level-deep references; the body links real files (references/input-formats.md, scripts/format_bibliography.py) that exist in the bundle. Minor gap: references/csl-styles.md exists but is not explicitly linked from the body.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 tight, specific description that names concrete actions across four formats and gives an explicit trigger clause covering journal submission and before/after comparison. Only minor synonym/extension coverage is missing from the trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — converting reference lists and in-text citations between four named formats (RIS, BibTeX, plain text, CSL-JSON), unifying styles, and before/after comparison — giving comprehensive coverage rather than vague abstraction.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (convert reference lists and in-text citations between the four formats) and 'when' ('triggered when you need to unify bibliography/citation styles before journal submission or compare before/after formatting differences').

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural keywords ('bibliography/citation styles', 'journal submission', 'before/after formatting') plus format names, but a few common synonyms/extensions (.bib, 'references', 'cite keys') a user might say are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (bibliography/citation reformatting for journal submission) with distinct triggers and named formats, making collision with unrelated skills unlikely.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
aipoch/medical-research-skills
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.