mentorship-meeting-agenda
Generate structured agendas for mentor-student one-on-one meetings
61
41%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
3.12xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/mentorship-meeting-agenda/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 clear niche (mentor-student 1:1 meetings) but is too brief to be effective for skill selection. It lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and doesn't enumerate the specific capabilities beyond basic agenda generation. The description would benefit from expanded trigger terms and clearer selection criteria.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'mentor meeting', '1:1', 'mentorship session', 'coaching check-in', or 'student progress review'.
Expand specific capabilities beyond 'generate agendas' - e.g., 'create discussion topics, track mentee goals, prepare feedback points, document action items'.
Include common variations of terminology: '1:1', 'one-on-one', 'mentorship', 'coaching', 'check-in meeting'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (mentor-student one-on-one meetings) and one action (generate structured agendas), but doesn't list multiple concrete actions like 'create discussion topics, track action items, set goals'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (generate agendas) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant keywords ('mentor', 'student', 'one-on-one', 'meetings', 'agendas') but missing common variations like '1:1', 'mentorship', 'check-in', 'coaching session', or 'meeting prep'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mentor-student context provides some specificity, but 'structured agendas' and 'meetings' could overlap with general meeting planning or other agenda-generation skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a basic structure for generating meeting agendas but is padded with excessive boilerplate sections that don't add value. The core functionality is underspecified - no actual script code, no example output, and no concrete discussion prompts are provided. The skill would benefit from removing template sections and adding executable examples.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly reduce the Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, and Lifecycle Status sections - they add no actionable guidance for this simple skill
Add a concrete example of a generated agenda showing what the output actually looks like
Include example discussion prompts for each agenda section to make the skill immediately actionable
Either provide the actual Python script implementation or remove the CLI reference and describe the agenda format directly
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes substantial boilerplate (Risk Assessment table, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) that adds little value for this simple agenda generation task. The core content is reasonably concise but padded with template sections. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides a CLI command and parameter list, but lacks the actual script implementation or concrete examples of generated output. The agenda sections are listed but no example agenda or discussion prompts are shown. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | For a simple single-command skill, the workflow is clear enough, but there's no validation step or example of what success looks like. No guidance on what to do if the script fails or produces unexpected output. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably organized with clear sections, but the boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) bloat the file unnecessarily. No references to external files for advanced usage. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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.