figure-legend-gen
Generate standardized figure legends for scientific charts and graphs.
34
30%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/figure-legend-gen/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%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 identifies a reasonably specific niche—generating figure legends for scientific visuals—but is too terse to be effective for skill selection. It lacks a 'Use when...' clause, misses common user trigger terms like 'caption' or 'plot description', and does not enumerate the specific actions or formatting standards involved.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks for figure captions, figure legends, chart descriptions, or plot annotations in a scientific context.'
Include common trigger term variations such as 'figure caption', 'plot description', 'chart label', 'figure annotation', and file/format references if applicable.
Expand the capability list with concrete actions, e.g., 'Generates numbered figure legends with statistical annotations, axis descriptions, and journal-style formatting for scientific charts, graphs, and plots.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (scientific charts/graphs) and one action (generate figure legends), but does not list multiple concrete actions or elaborate on what 'standardized' entails (e.g., formatting, numbering, caption structure). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what the skill does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and since the 'what' is also thin, this scores a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'figure legends', 'scientific charts', and 'graphs', but misses common variations users might say such as 'figure caption', 'plot description', 'chart annotation', or 'figure label'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of 'figure legends' and 'scientific' provides some distinctiveness, but it could overlap with general scientific writing skills or chart/graph generation skills without clearer trigger boundaries. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
27%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is heavily padded with generic boilerplate content (risk assessments, security checklists, lifecycle status, evaluation criteria) that wastes tokens and obscures the actual task-specific guidance. The core useful content—chart types, CLI parameters, and legend structure—is buried among repetitive template sections. The skill would benefit enormously from removing all generic filler and adding concrete examples of actual generated figure legends.
Suggestions
Remove all generic boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria, Input Validation template text, Response Template) that add no task-specific value and waste significant token budget.
Add a concrete example showing an input chart description and the expected generated figure legend output, so Claude knows exactly what good output looks like.
Consolidate the duplicated sections—merge 'Example Usage' and 'Usage', remove circular cross-references like 'See ## Prerequisites above', and eliminate the repeated '--help' commands in Audit-Ready Commands.
Fix the syntax error in the third usage example ('--image.png' should be '--input image.png') and ensure all examples are copy-paste ready.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose and repetitive. Contains massive amounts of boilerplate (risk assessment tables, security checklists, lifecycle status, evaluation criteria) that add no value for Claude. Multiple sections reference each other circularly ('See ## Prerequisites above', 'See ## Usage above'). The audit-ready commands section repeats '--help' three times. Much content is generic template filler rather than task-specific guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete CLI commands and parameter tables, which is useful. However, there's no actual example of generated output (what a figure legend looks like), the legend structure section is abstract rather than showing a concrete example, and the third usage example has a syntax error ('--image.png' instead of '--input image.png'). No bundle files are provided to verify that scripts/main.py actually exists or works. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow section provides a 5-step sequence but it's entirely generic and could apply to any skill. The 'Example run plan' in Usage is more specific but lacks validation checkpoints between steps. There's no feedback loop for when legend generation produces poor results or when chart type detection fails. Error handling is mentioned but not integrated into the workflow steps. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The document is a monolithic wall of text with 20+ sections, many of which are boilerplate that should not exist at all. References to 'references/legend_templates.md' and 'references/academic_style_guide.md' are mentioned but no bundle files are provided. Multiple sections cross-reference each other in confusing ways ('See ## Prerequisites above' appears before Prerequisites is defined). Content is poorly organized with related information scattered across distant sections. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- aipoch/medical-research-skills
- Commit
73f6514
- 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.