CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

meta-results-risk-of-bias

Generates the "Risk of Bias" results section for a meta-analysis based on assessment tables and statistics. Use when the user wants to draft the risk of bias analysis text from provided data tables.

60

Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/meta-results-risk-of-bias/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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.

The content is actionable and reasonably well-structured with a real backing script and a clear draft-then-format workflow, but it is weighed down by extensive generic boilerplate that explains concepts Claude already knows. Trimming the templated sections would materially improve token efficiency.

Suggestions

Remove the generic boilerplate sections ('When to Use', 'Key Features', 'Dependencies', 'Implementation Details', 'Output Contract', 'Validation and Safety Rules', 'Failure Handling', 'Input Validation', 'Quick Validation', 'Deterministic Output Rules', 'Completion Checklist') that restate general workflow discipline and keep only the risk-of-bias-specific guidance.

Consolidate the duplicated 'When to Use' / 'When Not to Use' / 'Required Inputs' / 'Input Validation' blocks into a single concise scoping section; the input requirements are currently spread across multiple sections.

Replace the vague 'See ## Workflow above for related details.' pointer in Implementation Details with the concrete two-step draft-then-format sequence, or delete it to avoid the circular reference.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is padded with many generic boilerplate sections ('When to Use', 'Key Features', 'Implementation Details', 'Output Contract', 'Validation and Safety Rules', 'Completion Checklist', etc.) that restate general workflow concepts Claude already knows rather than risk-of-bias specifics, matching the 'noticeably verbose' anchor.

2 / 5

Actionability

Provides a concrete prompt template (Role/Task/Requirements with the D1-D5 and >300 word constraints) and a copy-paste-ready command `python scripts/format_result.py --text "<generated_text>" --language "{{language}}"` backed by a real script, with only minor gaps from the placeholder template.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear two-step sequence (Draft Text then Format Output) is given with substeps, plus validation shortcuts and a completion checklist; it stops short of an explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loop on the actual output, so it is not a 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Implementation is split into real referenced bundle files (`scripts/format_result.py`, `scripts/validate_skill.py`) that are clearly signaled and one level deep, with the overview in SKILL.md; minor organization gaps from the heavy inline boilerplate keep it below 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

82%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.

The description is well-formed: it states a concrete deliverable, gives an explicit 'Use when' trigger, and occupies a distinctive niche. The only soft spot is specificity, which lists a couple of actions but is not comprehensive.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (meta-analysis risk of bias) and 1-2 concrete actions ('Generates the Risk of Bias results section', 'draft the risk of bias analysis text from provided data tables') but coverage is not comprehensive, matching the anchor for naming domain plus a couple actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (generates the Risk of Bias results section based on assessment tables and statistics) and 'when' ('Use when the user wants to draft the risk of bias analysis text from provided data tables') with a concrete trigger phrase.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage for the niche ('risk of bias', 'meta-analysis', 'draft the risk of bias analysis text'), with only minor variations/synonyms missing rather than the common phrases users would say.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear, narrow niche (meta-analysis risk of bias results) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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.