networking-email-drafter

Draft professional follow-up emails to contacts made at conferences - not too pushy, but memorable.

Quality

30%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/networking-email-drafter/SKILL.md

Quality

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 communicates a clear use case (conference follow-up emails) with a nice tone qualifier ('not too pushy, but memorable'), but lacks explicit trigger guidance and comprehensive action details. The missing 'Use when...' clause significantly weakens Claude's ability to select this skill appropriately from a large skill library.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'networking follow-up', 'conference contacts', 'trade show', 'business card', 'post-event email'.

Expand specific capabilities such as 'reference conversation topics, personalize greetings, suggest next steps, propose meeting times'.

Include file type or input triggers if applicable, e.g., 'when user provides contact list, business cards, or conference notes'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (follow-up emails, conferences) and describes the action (draft), but lacks comprehensive specific actions like 'reference conversation topics, suggest meeting times, personalize based on contact details'.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (draft follow-up emails) 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 natural terms like 'follow-up emails', 'conferences', and 'contacts', but missing common variations like 'networking', 'trade show', 'business card', 'post-event', or 'meeting follow-up'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The conference context provides some distinction from generic email skills, but could overlap with general email drafting or professional communication skills without clearer boundaries.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 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 is heavily padded with generic boilerplate (risk assessments, security checklists, lifecycle status, response templates) that overwhelms the actual email-drafting content. The core task - writing memorable but not pushy follow-up emails - receives minimal concrete guidance: no example emails, no tone calibration examples, no specific language patterns. The skill reads like a template that was filled in without tailoring to the actual task.

Suggestions

Remove all generic boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Response Template) and focus on email-specific guidance

Add 2-3 concrete example follow-up emails showing different tones (formal/casual/warm) with annotations explaining what makes them effective

Replace abstract 'Email Components' list with specific language patterns and phrases that achieve 'memorable but not pushy'

Consolidate redundant sections - remove circular references like 'See ## Prerequisites above' and eliminate the repeated skill description

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose with massive redundancy - 'When to Use' repeats the description, multiple sections reference each other circularly ('See ## Prerequisites above', 'See ## Usage above'), and includes extensive boilerplate (risk assessment tables, security checklists, lifecycle status) that adds no value for drafting follow-up emails.	1 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete CLI usage example with parameters (--contact, --topic, --conference), but the actual email drafting guidance is abstract ('Professional greeting', 'Value proposition', 'Soft ask') with no examples of what good follow-up emails look like or specific language patterns to use.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Has numbered workflow steps but they are generic process steps ('Confirm the user objective', 'Validate that the request matches') rather than email-drafting-specific guidance. Missing concrete validation of what makes a good networking email or how to verify the output quality.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Monolithic wall of text with poor organization - sections reference each other circularly, content is not appropriately split (boilerplate security checklists inline with core instructions), and the single reference file mentioned provides no clear value signal for what it contains.	1 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

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: about 12 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.