poster-layout-planner
Use poster layout planner for other workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.
19
0%
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/poster-layout-planner/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is critically weak across all dimensions. It fails to explain what the skill actually does, uses abstract jargon instead of natural trigger terms, and is so generic that it could conflict with nearly any other skill. The description reads more like a vague meta-instruction than a useful skill description.
Suggestions
Replace abstract language with concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Creates structured poster layouts with defined sections, dimensions, and content placement').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would actually say (e.g., 'Use when the user asks to design a poster, create a layout, or arrange visual content for print or display').
Remove the self-referential framing ('Use poster layout planner for other workflows') and instead directly describe the skill's capabilities and target use cases.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague, abstract language like 'structured execution', 'explicit assumptions', and 'clear output boundaries' without naming any concrete actions or specific capabilities. There is no indication of what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is essentially missing — it says to use a 'poster layout planner' for 'other workflows' but never explains what those workflows are or what the skill does. The 'when' is equally vague ('workflows that need structured execution'), providing no explicit triggers. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The terms used ('structured execution', 'explicit assumptions', 'clear output boundaries') are abstract jargon that no user would naturally say when seeking help. 'Poster layout planner' is mentioned but only as a reference, not as a trigger for the skill's actual purpose. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is extremely generic — 'workflows that need structured execution' could apply to virtually any planning, project management, or organizational skill. It provides no clear niche or distinct triggers to differentiate it from other skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is almost entirely generic boilerplate with minimal poster-layout-specific content. The actual domain knowledge (section placement, visual hierarchy, size recommendations, content flow optimization) is listed as bullet points in a Features section but never elaborated with actionable guidance. The document is bloated with repetitive process scaffolding, circular cross-references, and template sections that provide no concrete value for the stated task.
Suggestions
Replace generic workflow boilerplate with concrete poster layout planning instructions: specific layout algorithms, grid systems, section sizing rules, and visual hierarchy principles with examples.
Add concrete input/output examples showing a real poster layout request and the expected structured output, not just a minimal JSON schema stub.
Remove circular cross-references ('See ## Features above') and consolidate redundant sections (Error Handling, Input Validation, Response Template overlap significantly).
Remove boilerplate sections that don't add actionable value (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) or move them to a separate metadata file.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose and repetitive. Multiple sections reference each other circularly ('See ## Features above', 'See ## Prerequisites above', 'See ## Workflow above'). The skill repeats the same description string multiple times, includes boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) that add no actionable value, and explains generic concepts Claude already knows. The actual poster-layout-planning content is buried under layers of generic process scaffolding. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite being a skill about designing poster layouts, there is no concrete guidance on how to actually plan a poster layout. The code examples are limited to `python -m py_compile` and `python scripts/main.py --help` which are generic execution commands. No actual poster layout logic, algorithms, examples of input/output, or domain-specific instructions are provided. The workflow steps are entirely abstract ('Confirm the user objective', 'Validate that the request matches'). | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow section contains only vague, generic steps like 'Confirm the user objective' and 'Use the packaged script path or the documented reasoning path.' There are no concrete validation checkpoints specific to poster layout planning. The 'Example run plan' is similarly generic. No feedback loops exist for verifying layout quality or correctness. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The document is a monolithic wall of text with many sections that are either empty of real content or circular references ('See ## Features above for related details' when Features is listed below). References to `references/` directory are vague with no indication of what's actually there. The content is poorly organized with redundant sections (Error Handling, Input Validation, and Response Template all cover similar ground). | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 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.