limitation-and-risk-writer

Acknowledges limitations in sample, design, measurement, and validation in a professional way that improves credibility without undermining the whole paper. Use when writing the limitations paragraph of a Discussion section, preparing a grant risk assessment, responding to reviewers about study weaknesses, or framing scope boundaries for a paper. Also triggers on "write my limitations", "how should I address the limitation of", "reviewer said my sample is too small", or "help me word this limitation".

Quality

89%

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

Quality

Content

85%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.

A well-structured, highly actionable instruction-only skill with a clear sequenced workflow and concrete examples. Its main weakness is progressive disclosure: two bundle files exist but are orphaned from the body, and inline material could be split out.

Suggestions

Reference the existing bundle files from the body — e.g., add a pointer to references/audit-reference.md and document how scripts/main.py relates to the manual workflow, so they are discoverable rather than orphaned.

Consider moving the Limitation-Type Phrase Bank and/or the worked examples into a separate reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with one-level-deep links.

Trim the 'When to Use' section since it duplicates the frontmatter description, or replace it with a brief pointer to avoid token redundancy.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean for an instruction-only skill with no padding of concepts Claude already knows; the main trim opportunity is the 'When to Use' section restating the frontmatter description.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides a copy-paste limitation formula, a categorization table, four full example statements, per-context tone calibration, and a phrase bank — concrete and immediately executable guidance covering common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Five clearly sequenced steps (Collect → Categorize → Apply Formula → Assemble/Calibrate → Calibration Check) with an explicit Step-5 verification checklist acting as a feedback checkpoint before finalizing.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-sectioned with headers, but the provided bundle files (references/audit-reference.md and scripts/main.py) are never linked or signaled from the body, and content that could live in separate files (phrase bank, examples) is inlined.	3 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

95%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 strong, third-person description that crisply states the skill's purpose and gives concrete, natural-sounding trigger phrases for multiple writing contexts. The only minor gap is that the 'what' is framed around a single core action (acknowledging limitations) rather than an enumerated action list.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and several concrete actions ('Acknowledges limitations in sample, design, measurement, and validation... improves credibility without undermining the whole paper'), with only minor coverage gaps versus a fully comprehensive list.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (acknowledges limitations across four categories professionally) and 'when' ('Use when writing the limitations paragraph... preparing a grant risk assessment, responding to reviewers...') with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive natural trigger phrases a user would actually say ('write my limitations', 'reviewer said my sample is too small', 'help me word this limitation'), including synonym variations.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (study-limitations drafting for academic/medical writing) with distinct, domain-specific triggers that minimize overlap with other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 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
Path: awesome-med-research-skills/Academic Writing/limitation-and-risk-writer/SKILL.md
Commit: f5ef65b

Reviewed: ~9 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.