metagenomic-krona-chart
Generate interactive Krona charts (sunburst plots) for metagenomic samples from Kraken2, Bracken, or custom TSV taxonomy abundance data.
78
73%
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/Data analysis/metagenomic-krona-chart/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
82%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 is a strong, domain-specific description with excellent specificity and trigger term coverage for bioinformatics users. The main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which would help Claude know exactly when to select this skill. The technical terminology is appropriate for the target audience and creates clear distinctiveness.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to visualize taxonomic abundance, create Krona plots, or analyze Kraken2/Bracken output.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists specific concrete actions: 'Generate interactive Krona charts (sunburst plots)' and specifies exact input types: 'Kraken2, Bracken, or custom TSV taxonomy abundance data'. Multiple specific capabilities are clearly stated. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (generate Krona charts from specific data types) but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The when is only implied through the data types mentioned. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'Krona charts', 'sunburst plots', 'metagenomic', 'Kraken2', 'Bracken', 'TSV', 'taxonomy abundance'. These are domain-specific terms that users in bioinformatics would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche in metagenomics visualization. The specific tool names (Krona, Kraken2, Bracken) and domain (metagenomic taxonomy) make it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides good actionable content with concrete examples, executable commands, and clear parameter documentation. However, it suffers from verbosity in the validation/refusal sections and has overlapping content between error handling, fallback behavior, and output requirements sections. The workflow could be clearer with better integration of validation checkpoints into the main execution flow.
Suggestions
Consolidate the overlapping sections (Error Handling, Fallback Behavior, Output Requirements, Response Template) into a single, concise section to reduce redundancy
Simplify the input validation refusal text - the current version is overly verbose and repeats the instruction to validate scope multiple times
Integrate validation checkpoints directly into the workflow steps (e.g., '3. Validate input format -> if invalid, report missing columns and stop')
Move the Response Template section to a separate reference file since it's generic guidance not specific to Krona chart generation
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill contains some redundancy - the input validation/refusal section is overly verbose, the response template and output requirements sections overlap, and there's repetition between error handling and fallback behavior sections. However, the core technical content (parameters, formats, usage) is reasonably efficient. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable commands, concrete input format examples with actual data, clear parameter tables, and copy-paste ready code snippets. The quick check section and usage examples are immediately actionable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow section lists steps but mixes scope validation with execution steps in a confusing way. Validation checkpoints exist in fallback behavior but aren't integrated into the main workflow. The numbered workflow steps are somewhat abstract rather than concrete execution steps. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably organized with clear sections, but everything is in one file when some content (like the detailed response template, output requirements) could be separated. No references to external documentation for advanced use cases. The skill is somewhat monolithic for its length. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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
ca9aaa4
- 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.