patient-recruitment-ad-gen
Generate ethical, compliant, and patient-friendly recruitment advertisements for clinical trials.
44
31%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/patient-recruitment-ad-gen/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
40%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 identifies a clear and distinctive niche—clinical trial recruitment advertising—which reduces conflict risk. However, it lacks a 'Use when...' clause entirely, which is a significant gap for skill selection, and could benefit from more specific concrete actions and natural trigger terms that users would employ when requesting this type of content.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user needs to create recruitment materials for clinical studies, patient enrollment ads, or IRB-compliant trial advertisements.'
Include more natural trigger term variations such as 'study flyer', 'participant recruitment', 'enrollment materials', 'trial ad', 'IRB-compliant', and 'patient enrollment'.
List additional concrete actions beyond 'generate', such as 'draft, review, and adapt recruitment flyers, social media posts, and print ads for clinical trials'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (clinical trial recruitment) and the primary action (generate advertisements), with qualifiers (ethical, compliant, patient-friendly), but does not list multiple distinct concrete actions like drafting, reviewing, formatting, or adapting ads. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what the skill does (generate recruitment ads for clinical trials) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and since the 'when' is entirely absent, this scores a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'recruitment advertisements', 'clinical trials', and 'patient-friendly', but misses common variations users might say such as 'patient recruitment', 'trial ad', 'study flyer', 'IRB-compliant', 'participant recruitment', or 'enrollment materials'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of clinical trials, recruitment advertisements, and compliance requirements creates a very specific niche that is unlikely to conflict with other skills. This is a clearly distinct domain. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill contains genuinely useful domain-specific content (IRB compliance requirements, prohibited content list, input parameters, CLI example) buried under layers of generic boilerplate that applies to any skill, not specifically to recruitment ad generation. The file is roughly 3x longer than it needs to be due to repeated generic sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria, multiple overlapping workflow descriptions). A sample output showing a complete recruitment ad would dramatically improve actionability.
Suggestions
Remove all generic boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria, Input Validation, Response Template, Output Requirements) that are not specific to recruitment ad generation — these waste tokens on things Claude already knows.
Add a concrete example output showing a complete, compliant recruitment ad generated from the example inputs, so Claude has a clear target format.
Consolidate the three overlapping workflow descriptions (Example Usage run plan, Workflow section, Implementation Details) into a single, concrete, domain-specific workflow with validation checkpoints like 'verify readability level' and 'check against prohibited content list'.
Remove circular self-references ('See ## Prerequisites above', 'See ## Usage above') that point to sections within the same document and add no navigational value.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose and repetitive. Contains massive amounts of boilerplate (Risk Assessment tables, Security Checklists, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) that add no value for Claude. Multiple sections reference each other circularly ('See ## Prerequisites above', 'See ## Usage above'). The generic workflow, error handling, input validation, and response template sections are not specific to this skill and waste tokens on things Claude already knows. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The input parameters and CLI example are concrete and executable, and the compliance requirements (essential elements, prohibited content) provide specific domain guidance. However, much of the 'workflow' is generic platitudes ('Confirm the user objective...') rather than task-specific instructions, and there's no example of actual output (a sample recruitment ad) which would be the most actionable reference. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There are multiple competing workflow sections (Example Usage run plan, Workflow section, Response Template) that are all generic and don't describe the actual steps for generating a compliant recruitment ad. No validation checkpoints specific to the domain (e.g., IRB compliance check, readability score verification). The workflow steps are abstract ('Validate that the request matches the documented scope') rather than concrete. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References to external files (references/ folder with fda_guidance.md, template_examples/) are well-signaled and one level deep. However, the SKILL.md itself is monolithic with enormous amounts of inline content that should either be removed or split out (security checklist, risk assessment, evaluation criteria, lifecycle status). The core domain content is buried among boilerplate. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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 | |
- Repository
- aipoch/medical-research-skills
- Commit
8277276
- 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.