content-proofreading

An academic proofreading skill for Chinese/English manuscripts, triggered when you need automated checks for spelling, grammar, terminology consistency, and formatting before submission.

Quality

69%

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/Other/content-proofreading/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

63%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 a well-structured, actionable overview with executable examples and an explicit validation step, but it suffers from cross-section redundancy, references to missing bundle files, and inline detail that could be externalized.

Suggestions

Add the missing requirements.txt and assets/rules/ directory referenced in Dependencies and Extensibility, or remove those references to avoid dead-end navigation.

Collapse the redundant English/Chinese check category lists so each category is defined once (e.g., keep detail only in Key Features and reference it from the workflow steps).

Move the inline terminology/rule JSON schema examples and module architecture details into a separate reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with one-level-deep links.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The English/Chinese check categories (spelling, grammar, punctuation/style) are restated across Agent Workflow Step 3/4, Key Features, and Implementation Details, creating notable redundancy that could be tightened, though no concepts Claude already knows are over-explained.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready bash commands, a concrete CLI parameter table, and a complete executable Python module example, but the install step references a missing requirements.txt, so the first user action would fail.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Seven clearly sequenced steps with an explicit Step 7 validation and supporting Failure Handling / Quick Validation sections for a batch operation; the validate-to-fix retry loop is described generically in Failure Handling rather than woven into the steps as an explicit feedback loop, leaving minor validation gaps.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Good section structure with scripts properly externalized and clearly referenced, but the body references non-existent bundle paths (requirements.txt, assets/rules/) and inlines detailed JSON schema/architecture content that could be split into separate reference files, creating broken navigation.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

75%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 clearly communicates a bilingual academic proofreading niche with concrete action categories and an explicit trigger clause, but the trigger phrasing is mechanical and the action list relies on standard proofreading categories rather than highly specific operations.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions — 'automated checks for spelling, grammar, terminology consistency, and formatting' — but these are standard proofreading categories rather than distinct specific operations, leaving minor gaps in coverage.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('academic proofreading skill... automated checks for spelling, grammar, terminology consistency, and formatting') and when ('triggered when you need automated checks... before submission'); the 'when' is present and concrete but merges the trigger into the action list rather than cleanly separating trigger scenarios, so it is not a full 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good keyword coverage with natural terms ('academic proofreading', 'manuscripts', 'spelling', 'grammar', 'before submission'), but missing common synonyms ('paper', 'copyediting', 'language check') and file extensions (.docx, .md), and the 'triggered when you need automated checks' framing is somewhat mechanical rather than natural user speech.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The bilingual Chinese/English academic-manuscript niche with terminology consistency is a mostly distinct trigger set with minimal conflict risk, though generic spelling/grammar wording could overlap with general writing or editing skills.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: aipoch/medical-research-skills
Path: scientific-skills/Other/content-proofreading/SKILL.md
Commit: f5ef65b

Reviewed: ~14 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.