microbiome-diversity-reporter
Interpret Alpha and Beta diversity metrics from 16S rRNA sequencing results and generate visualization reports for microbiome analysis.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill microbiome-diversity-reporter78
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
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 well-crafted description for a specialized scientific skill with excellent domain-specific terminology that serves as natural trigger terms. The main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which would help Claude know exactly when to select this skill. The specificity and distinctiveness are strong due to the technical nature of the domain.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user mentions microbiome data, 16S sequencing, diversity analysis, OTU tables, or QIIME/DADA2 outputs.'
Consider adding common file formats or tool names users might mention (e.g., '.biom files', 'QIIME2', 'phyloseq') to improve trigger coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Interpret Alpha and Beta diversity metrics', 'generate visualization reports', with clear domain context '16S rRNA sequencing results' and 'microbiome analysis'. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (interpret diversity metrics, generate visualization reports) but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. The when is only implied through domain terminology. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes highly specific natural keywords users in this domain would use: 'Alpha diversity', 'Beta diversity', '16S rRNA', 'microbiome analysis', 'sequencing results'. These are the exact terms a researcher would mention. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche with very specific scientific terminology (16S rRNA, Alpha/Beta diversity, microbiome). Extremely unlikely to conflict with other skills due to the specialized domain. | 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 executable commands and clear input/output formats, but is bloated with boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) that don't help Claude use the tool. It lacks validation workflows for error handling and could benefit from better progressive disclosure by moving detailed reference content to separate files.
Suggestions
Remove boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) that don't provide actionable guidance for using the tool
Add validation steps: how to verify input file format is correct, how to check if output report generated successfully, what to do if errors occur
Move the detailed parameter table and input format specifications to a separate REFERENCE.md file, keeping only quick-start examples in the main skill
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary sections like Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, and Lifecycle Status that add bulk without providing actionable guidance. The core content (commands, parameters, formats) is reasonably efficient, but the boilerplate sections waste tokens. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable command-line examples with clear parameter documentation, concrete input/output format examples, and a complete JSON output example. Commands are copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Commands are listed but there's no validation workflow or error handling guidance. For a tool that processes data files and generates reports, there should be validation steps (e.g., verify input format, check output integrity) but none are provided. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably structured with clear sections, but everything is in one file with no references to external documentation. The References section lists academic papers rather than tool documentation. Some content (like the full parameter table) could be split into a separate reference file. | 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 | |
- 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.