networking-email-drafter

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

Quality

50%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/networking-email-drafter/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content provides a usable command interface and a reasonable workflow, but it is weighed down by boilerplate sections and lacks concrete, copy-paste email-drafting guidance. Trimming templated material and making the drafting instructions executable would materially improve it.

Suggestions

Remove or move generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) into a reference file so the SKILL.md stays lean.

Replace high-level email-component bullets with a concrete, copy-paste-ready example email or prompt template the script produces.

Add an explicit validation feedback loop (e.g. draft -> review against tone/scope checklist -> revise) to make workflow checkpoints concrete.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is padded with generic templated sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status, Response Template) and cross-references like "See ## Usage above" rather than concise skill-specific guidance, though it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows.	2 / 3
Actionability	A concrete usage command and parameter list are provided, but the core email-drafting guidance ("Professional greeting", "Soft ask") is high-level rather than executable, and the script's actual behavior is not shown.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear 5-step workflow and a py_compile validation check are present, but validation checkpoints are largely implicit and there is no feedback loop for error recovery.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	It links to a real one-level-deep reference (references/audit-reference.md), but the SKILL.md itself is a monolithic wall of inline templated sections that could be split out for cleaner navigation.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 clear and reasonably specific about its single purpose, but it reads as one action with an implied rather than explicit trigger. Adding a "Use when..." clause and a couple more natural trigger phrases would lift it from anchor-2 to anchor-3 across most dimensions.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when following up with contacts met at a conference, sending a networking or thank-you email after a meeting."

Add a second concrete capability (e.g. suggesting subject lines or a follow-up timeline) so specificity reaches anchor 3.

Include common user phrasings like "networking email" or "reach out after a conference" to improve trigger term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Draft professional follow-up emails to contacts made at conferences" names a concrete action and domain, but lists only one action rather than multiple specific capabilities, matching anchor 2.	2 / 3
Completeness	The "what" is clear, but there is no explicit "Use when..." clause, so the "when" is only implied; per guidelines a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	"follow-up emails", "conferences", and "contacts" are relevant terms users might say, but common variations like "networking", "thank you email", or "reach out after a meeting" are missing.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The conference follow-up niche is fairly specific, but it could still overlap with general email-drafting skills and lacks fully distinct triggers.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: aipoch/medical-research-skills
Commit: 7cc5680

Reviewed: 3 days 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.