cover-letter-drafter

Generates professional cover letters for journal submissions and job.

Quality

42%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/cover-letter-drafter/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

35%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill provides genuinely concrete parameters and runnable commands, but the body is dominated by templated boilerplate and redundant self-referential sections, with generic workflow steps and weakly-signaled references holding it back.

Suggestions

Remove the empty 'See ## X above for related details' pointers and the generic boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Response Template) that do not advance the cover-letter task.

Re-fence the Usage block as ```bash, replace the placeholder 'cd 20260318/...' working directory with a real relative path, and add a validation step that checks the generated cover letter output.

Reference the bundle file by name (e.g., 'See references/guidelines.md') and move the detailed parameter/explanation content there to slim the SKILL.md overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is padded with self-referential empty pointers ('See ## Features above for related details'), generic advice Claude already knows, and templated sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status with a stale 'Next Review Date: 2026-03-06'), so most tokens do not earn their place.	1 / 3
Actionability	A concrete Parameters table and real command examples ('python scripts/main.py --purpose journal --recipient "Nature Medicine" ...') are provided, but the main usage block is fenced as ```text rather than bash, and the example 'cd "20260318/scientific-skills/..."' is a non-executable placeholder, leaving minor incompleteness.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Multiple sequenced workflow lists with a fallback path and a py_compile checkpoint exist, but the steps are generic boilerplate untied to the cover-letter task, the checkpoints validate the script rather than the deliverable, and overlapping redundant process lists add noise.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Real one-level-deep bundle files exist (references/guidelines.md, scripts/main.py) and are referenced, but they are signalled generically by directory ('references/') rather than by filename, and the ~220-line SKILL.md body keeps large amounts of generic templated content inline that should be trimmed or split.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 states a concrete capability but is truncated ('and job'), omits fellowships documented elsewhere, and provides no explicit 'Use when' trigger, leaving it at the mid-level across all dimensions.

Suggestions

Replace the truncated 'and job' with 'job applications' and add 'and fellowships' to match the body's documented scope.

Append an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when drafting cover letters for journal submissions, job applications, or fellowship applications.'

Add the action 'customize' or 'tailor' and terms like 'manuscript submission' to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names a concrete action ('Generates professional cover letters') and two contexts ('journal submissions' and 'job'), but offers only a single action verb and omits fellowships that appear in the body, so it is not comprehensive enough for a 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated (generates cover letters for journal submissions and job), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms like 'cover letters' and 'journal submissions' are present, but common variations ('job applications', 'fellowship', 'manuscript submission') are missing and 'and job' is truncated, leaving coverage incomplete.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Cover letters for journal/job contexts form a reasonably clear niche, but the truncated 'and job' phrase and absence of fellowships make it somewhat generic and able to overlap with general academic-writing skills.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 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
Commit: 7cc5680

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.