CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

medical-cv-resume-builder

Use medical cv resume builder for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.

32

Quality

26%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/medical-cv-resume-builder/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body is a verbose, boilerplate-heavy wrapper around a thin CV builder: it provides executable commands and an input/output spec but almost no domain guidance, and the references file is nearly empty. Workflow sequencing and file structure exist but are undercut by padding and shallow validation.

Suggestions

Remove generic boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) and the repeated description strings to respect token budget.

Populate references/guidelines.md with actual US medical CV standards (section order, formatting rules, achievement-writing guidance) or remove the hollow reference.

Add an explicit output-validation checkpoint (e.g., verify required CV sections are present and formatted) to the workflow before returning the deliverable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is padded with generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) and repeats the description string multiple times, plus confusing self-referential pointers like 'See ## Features above', matching the verbose/padded anchor.

1 / 3

Actionability

Concrete commands (py_compile, python scripts/main.py) and an input/output spec are present, but core CV-building guidance is missing and references/guidelines.md is essentially empty, matching the some-concrete-but-incomplete anchor.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A 5-step workflow with a fallback path and scope-validation is provided, but validation of actual output correctness is implicit rather than an explicit checkpoint, matching the sequence-present-but-checkpoints-missing anchor.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

References are one level deep and the paths are real (references/, scripts/main.py), but the reference file is hollow, inline boilerplate should be separated, and self-referential 'see above' pointers harm navigation, matching the some-structure anchor.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

17%

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 vague and misleading: it never mentions CVs, resumes, or medical formatting, instead relying on generic academic-writing boilerplate. It lacks natural trigger terms and a concrete 'Use when...' clause, making it likely to conflict with other writing skills.

Suggestions

Rewrite the description to name the concrete capability, e.g. 'Builds medical CVs and resumes following US academic standards, organizing education, experience, and achievements.'

Add an explicit trigger clause: 'Use when the user needs to create or format a medical CV, curriculum vitae, or resume.'

Replace jargon ('structured execution', 'output boundaries') with natural terms users would actually say (CV, resume, curriculum vitae, medical).

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description offers only abstract phrases ('structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries') and never states the concrete capability of building medical CVs or resumes, matching the vague/no-actions anchor.

1 / 3

Completeness

A weak 'what' is present (academic writing workflows) and the 'when' is only implied via 'for...'; with no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, completeness is capped at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

No natural user terms appear (no 'CV', 'resume', or 'curriculum vitae'); the terms present ('academic writing workflows', 'output boundaries') are technical jargon, matching the no-natural-keywords anchor.

1 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Generic academic-writing language omits the medical-CV niche entirely, so it would overlap with many writing skills, matching the very-generic/conflicts-with-many anchor.

1 / 3

Total

5

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
aipoch/medical-research-skills
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.