medical-cv-resume-builder
Use medical cv resume builder for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.
39
Quality
24%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/medical-cv-resume-builder/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description fails to communicate what the skill actually does - it names a domain (medical CV/resume building) but describes only abstract process qualities rather than concrete capabilities. The lack of specific actions (e.g., 'formats publications', 'organizes research experience') and concrete trigger scenarios makes it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill appropriately.
Suggestions
Replace abstract process language with concrete actions: e.g., 'Creates and formats academic CVs for medical professionals, organizes publications, research experience, clinical rotations, and certifications'
Add explicit trigger guidance with natural user phrases: e.g., 'Use when user mentions medical CV, academic resume, physician curriculum vitae, residency application, or faculty position application'
Include specific document elements or sections the skill handles: e.g., 'publications list, grants, teaching experience, board certifications, CME credits'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language like 'structured execution', 'explicit assumptions', and 'clear output boundaries' without describing any concrete actions. It doesn't specify what the skill actually does with CVs or resumes. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is extremely weak - it doesn't explain what the skill actually does beyond vague process descriptors. The 'when' clause exists but is abstract ('workflows that need structured execution') rather than providing concrete trigger scenarios. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords ('medical', 'cv', 'resume', 'academic writing') that users might naturally say, but lacks common variations like 'curriculum vitae', 'job application', 'publications', or specific academic document types. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of 'medical cv resume builder' and 'academic writing' provides some niche specificity, but the vague process language ('structured execution', 'explicit assumptions') could overlap with many other workflow-oriented skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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 content is excessively verbose and poorly organized, with circular internal references and significant boilerplate that doesn't serve the core purpose of building medical CVs. While it includes some useful elements like input parameters and output format, the actual actionable guidance for CV generation is buried under process documentation. The skill would benefit from dramatic reduction in length and focus on concrete examples of CV generation.
Suggestions
Remove circular references ('See ## Features above') and reorganize sections in logical order with Features and Prerequisites appearing before they're referenced
Cut boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) to a separate file or remove entirely - they don't help Claude build CVs
Add a concrete example showing actual input data (sample experiences/education) and the resulting CV markdown output
Consolidate the repeated skill description into a single clear statement at the top instead of repeating it in 'When to Use' and 'Key Features'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose with significant redundancy - multiple sections reference each other circularly ('See ## Features above', 'See ## Prerequisites above'), repeats the same description multiple times, and includes boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status) that add little value for a CV builder skill. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides some concrete commands (python -m py_compile, python scripts/main.py) and an input/output schema, but lacks actual executable code showing how to use the tool. The 'Example Usage' section shows how to run the script but not how to structure the input data or what the actual CV generation looks like. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The Workflow section provides a 5-step sequence and there's error handling guidance, but validation checkpoints are vague ('Validate that the request matches the documented scope') rather than concrete. Missing specific validation commands for the CV output itself. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic document with poor organization - circular references ('See ## Features above'), content that should be in separate files (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria) is inline, and the structure is confusing with sections appearing out of logical order. | 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
4a48721
- 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.