CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

paper-lookup

Search 10 academic paper databases via REST APIs for research papers, preprints, and scholarly articles. Covers PubMed, PMC (full text), bioRxiv, medRxiv, arXiv, OpenAlex, Crossref, Semantic Scholar, CORE, Unpaywall. Use when searching for papers, citations, DOI/PMID lookups, abstracts, full text, open access, preprints, citation graphs, author search, or any scholarly literature query. Triggers on mentions of any supported database or requests like "find papers on X" or "look up this DOI".

74

Quality

93%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%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 body is a well-orchestrated overview: dense operational tables, a clear five-step workflow with explicit error-recovery feedback loops, and clean one-level-deep delegation to ten verified reference files. Its only weaknesses are mild — a slightly padded opening step and no inline example call, meaning even trivial lookups require reading a reference file first.

Suggestions

Trim step 1 ('Understand the query -- What is the user looking for? A specific paper by DOI? Papers on a topic?...') to a single line; the query-type breakdown is already fully encoded in the By Use Case and Cross-Database Queries tables.

Add one minimal inline example (e.g., a PubMed eSearch URL like https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/esearch.fcgi?db=pubmed&term={query}&retmode=json) so simple lookups are executable without first reading a reference file.

Consider compressing the six-platform 'Making API Calls' fetch-tool table to the most common platforms and a single fallback rule ('use your environment's HTTP fetch tool; fall back to curl'), since most sessions run on one platform.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Quotes: the body is almost entirely operational tables ("max 3 req/sec without key, 10 with key", "Crossref... add mailto param for polite pool", env var names, identifier formats) with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Minor trimmable instances remain: step 1 "Understand the query -- What is the user looking for? A specific paper by DOI? Papers on a topic?" restates what the selection tables already encode, and the six-platform HTTP fetch tool table is broader than most sessions need. This matches anchor 4 (efficient, minor over-explanation) rather than 5, where every token earns its place; not 3: there is no padded section or unnecessary explanation.

4 / 5

Actionability

Quotes: concrete guidance throughout — "Cross-referencing IDs: Semantic Scholar accepts DOI, PMID, PMCID, and arXiv ID via prefixes (e.g., DOI:10.1038/nature12373)", "Pass as: &api_key=YOUR_KEY" (in references), "If you get HTTP 429 (rate limit), wait briefly and retry once", a copy-ready output template, and reference files verified to contain fully executable example URLs. The gap: the body itself contains zero inline example API calls, deferring all endpoint detail to the reference files, so a simple lookup requires a file read first. This matches anchor 4 (mostly executable, minor gaps) rather than 5 (specific examples cover the common cases inline); not 3: nothing is pseudocode or high-level hand-waving.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Quotes: a numbered "Core Workflow" (understand → select databases → read reference file → make calls → return results) with explicit output requirements ("If a query returned no results, say so explicitly rather than omitting it"), plus a dedicated Error Recovery section with feedback loops: "Check the identifier format... Try alternative identifiers... Try a different database... Report the failure -- tell the user which database failed, the error, and what you tried", and rate-limit retry guidance. This matches anchor 5 (clear sequence with explicit validation and feedback loops for error recovery); not 4: checkpoints are explicit, not implicit.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Quotes: "Each database has a reference file in references/ with endpoint details, query formats, and example calls. Read the relevant file(s) before making API calls" and an "Available Databases" section with a Reference File column mapping all ten databases to their files (references/pubmed.md, references/arxiv.md, etc.) — all ten verified to exist on disk, one level deep, with spot-check confirming they contain executable endpoint examples. The split is appropriate: orchestration in SKILL.md, endpoint detail in references. Matches anchor 5 (clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references, easy navigation); not 4: no inlined content that belongs in a reference file and no navigation gaps.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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 is a model example: third-person voice, specific capability list, all ten databases named, and an explicit 'Use when / Triggers on' clause with natural request phrasings. Both what and when are answered with concrete trigger terms, and the domain niche is unmistakable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Quotes: "Search 10 academic paper databases via REST APIs for research papers, preprints, and scholarly articles" plus named capabilities "DOI/PMID lookups, abstracts, full text, open access, preprints, citation graphs, author search" — multiple specific concrete actions with all ten databases enumerated, matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor. Not 4: the action list is complete for the domain (find, look up, fetch full text, citation graphs, author search) rather than having minor gaps; not below 4 because there is no generic filler at all.

5 / 5

Completeness

Quotes: what — "Search 10 academic paper databases via REST APIs for research papers, preprints, and scholarly articles"; when — "Use when searching for papers... or any scholarly literature query. Triggers on mentions of any supported database or requests like 'find papers on X' or 'look up this DOI'". Both what and when are explicit with concrete trigger phrases, exactly matching the anchor-5 good example. Not 4: the when clause is already fully explicit with example phrasings, not merely adequate.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes: "papers, citations, DOI/PMID lookups, abstracts, full text, open access, preprints, citation graphs, author search, or any scholarly literature query" plus natural request phrasings "find papers on X" and "look up this DOI". This covers the natural vocabulary users would say plus synonyms (scholarly literature, preprints) and database names, matching the comprehensive anchor. Not 4: no common variation of the request is missing; not below 4: the terms are natural user phrasing, not jargon.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Quotes: "Covers PubMed, PMC (full text), bioRxiv, medRxiv, arXiv, OpenAlex, Crossref, Semantic Scholar, CORE, Unpaywall" and "DOI/PMID lookups" — a clear niche (academic literature search) with highly distinctive triggers (specific database names, DOI/PMID identifiers). Not 4: no closely related skill (general web search, citation formatting) would plausibly be triggered by these database-name and identifier triggers.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
aipoch/medical-research-skills
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.