note-summarizer

Organize study notes into a structured knowledge-point outline and export to a .docx summary when you need a shareable, hierarchical document from Word/PPT/Text/Markdown inputs.

Quality

60%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Other/note-summarizer/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%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 skill supplies concrete, executable guidance and a usable input schema, but its body is bloated by five duplicated boilerplate sections, inconsistent dependency versions, and a broken reference to a missing example file. Workflow validation is present but lacks a feedback loop.

Suggestions

Delete the boilerplate duplicate sections (lines 11–50) and keep only the substantive numbered sections (1–5), which alone would remove roughly half the body.

Reconcile the conflicting Python version requirements (3.10+ in the first Dependencies section vs 3.9+ in section 3) and pin the third-party packages (python-docx, python-pptx, Pillow).

Either create examples/example.json or remove the 'Basic verification' command referencing it, and add a validate→fix→retry loop around the batch run for workflow clarity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body duplicates all five top-level sections (When to Use, Key Features, Dependencies, Example Usage, Implementation Details) — a generic boilerplate set at lines 11–50 mirrors the real content at lines 52–135 — plus meta-commentary like 'Add pinned versions if this skill needs stricter environment control', making it noticeably verbose with padded sections.	2 / 5
Actionability	Provides executable commands ('python scripts/note_summarizer.py --json input.json'), a complete copy-paste JSON config, and a full input schema with defaults and types; minor gaps are the undocumented interactive mode and a referenced example file that does not exist.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A 4-step run plan and a 'Basic verification' section with success criteria are present, but this batch operation has no validate→fix→retry feedback loop, so workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the batch-operations guidance.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	There is section structure and the one real bundle file (scripts/note_summarizer.py) is correctly referenced, but 'Basic verification' cites examples/example.json which is absent, and the duplicated sections are inline content that should be consolidated.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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 answers both what and when with a clear, fairly niche purpose and good format-keyword coverage. Its main weaknesses are second-person voice and a thin set of natural trigger synonyms.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person to remove 'when you need' (e.g., 'Exports a structured .docx summary. Use when summarizing study notes from Word/PPT/Text/Markdown into a shareable hierarchical outline.') to recover the specificity penalty.

Add natural trigger synonyms users actually say — 'summarize notes', 'lecture notes', 'study summary', 'outline' — alongside the format names.

Broaden the 'when' clause with concrete trigger phrases (e.g., 'when the user mentions class notes, lecture slides, or needs a study summary') to push completeness toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the study-notes domain and two concrete actions ('Organize study notes into a structured knowledge-point outline' and 'export to a .docx summary') plus Word/PPT/Text/Markdown formats, which sits around a 4, but the second-person 'when you need' triggers the voice penalty reducing specificity by 1.	3 / 5
Completeness	It states what it does (organize notes into an outline, export .docx) and when to use it ('when you need a shareable, hierarchical document'), but the when-clause is a single condition rather than the varied concrete triggers of a 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good coverage of natural format terms and an extension ('.docx', 'Word/PPT/Text/Markdown', 'study notes'), but common synonyms like 'summarize', 'outline', or 'lecture notes' are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The study-notes → knowledge-point outline → .docx niche is mostly distinct with minor overlap risk against generic document-summarizer skills, short of the minimal-conflict 5.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 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
Path: scientific-skills/Other/note-summarizer/SKILL.md
Commit: 63c61d3

Reviewed: 11 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.