dei-statement-drafter

Draft Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion statements for academic applications.

Quality

71%

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/dei-statement-drafter/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

70%

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

The content is highly actionable with a clear validated workflow and a clean one-level reference, but it is weighed down by large amounts of generic boilerplate and duplicated commands that consume the context window for little benefit. Trimming the template filler would materially raise conciseness.

Suggestions

Remove or move to a reference the generic boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status, Response Template) that add no DEI-specific value.

De-duplicate the repeated py_compile and --help commands so each appears once in its relevant section, and fix the broken "See `## X` above" cross-references.

Cut redundant template phrasing (e.g. repeated 'Scope-focused workflow aligned to...' lines) so every remaining token earns its place.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is padded with generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status, Response Template) and repeats py_compile/--help commands multiple times; broken cross-references like "See `## Prerequisites` above" add tokens without value, matching the verbose score-1 anchor.	1 / 3
Actionability	It gives fully executable commands (`python -m py_compile scripts/main.py`, `python scripts/main.py --help`, a real usage invocation), a concrete parameters table, and the bundled `scripts/main.py` runs as documented.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The Workflow section lists a clearly sequenced 5-step path with an explicit validation/stop-early checkpoint (step 2) and a documented fallback path (step 5), satisfying the explicit-validation anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	SKILL.md is an overview that points one level deep to a real, clearly signaled reference (references/audit-reference.md) with no nested chains; structure is well-organized per the simple-skill scoring note.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

72%

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 specific and well-targeted with natural trigger terms, but it omits an explicit "Use when..." clause, leaving the "when to use" half implicit. Adding trigger guidance would lift completeness and overall quality.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when drafting DEI statements for faculty, postdoc, or grant applications, or when the user asks for diversity/equity statement help.'

Enumerate a few concrete actions beyond 'draft' (e.g. structure, tailor to template, suggest revisions) to push specificity from 2 to 3.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Draft Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion statements for academic applications" names the domain and one concrete action (drafting) but does not enumerate multiple specific actions, matching the score-2 anchor rather than the multi-action score-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	It answers what the skill does but has no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces natural terms a user would actually say — "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion statements," "DEI statements," and "academic applications" — giving good coverage of common phrasings.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The DEI-statement-for-academic-applications niche is clearly bounded with distinct triggers, making it unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 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.