presentation-hook

Creates engaging opening statements and powerful closings for medical.

Quality

51%

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/Academic Writing/presentation-hook/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

48%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 content is well-sectioned and includes a real, parseable script with a coherent workflow, but it is padded with generic template boilerplate and the documented usage does not match the script's actual interface. Tightening and aligning examples with the code would materially raise quality.

Suggestions

Remove or move generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) out of the main body so only presentation-hook-specific guidance remains.

Align the usage examples with the script's real interface: either add argparse/CLI args to main.py or replace the `--help` and Input Parameters table with the actual invocation.

Link `references/guidelines.md` explicitly and move detailed reference material there rather than vaguely pointing at `references/`.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is noticeably padded with generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status, Output Requirements, Response Template) and broken cross-references like 'See `## Features` above', plus a placeholder example path.	2 / 5
Actionability	It references a real `scripts/main.py` and gives concrete commands, but claims `python scripts/main.py --help` while the script accepts no arguments and runs hardcoded inputs, and the documented Input Parameters have no way to be passed.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A 5-step Workflow and 4-step run plan are sequenced with an explicit scope-validation checkpoint (step 2), a Quick Check compile command, and a fallback path (step 5); this is a non-destructive skill so no destructive cap applies.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is sectioned and mentions `references/`, but `references/guidelines.md` is never linked, references are only vaguely signaled, and content that could live in separate files (security/evaluation boilerplate) is inlined.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 states a clear purpose and a concrete niche but omits any explicit trigger guidance and lacks natural keyword synonyms. It is functional yet incomplete for reliable skill selection.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers such as 'preparing a medical presentation, speech, or talk and needing an opening hook or memorable closing'.

Include natural synonyms users would say ('presentation', 'speech', 'talk', 'hook') and clarify what 'for medical' means (e.g., 'for medical presentations').

Consider listing a third concrete action (e.g., audience-specific hooks) to lift specificity toward a 4.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("medical") and two concrete actions ("opening statements" and "closings"), matching the 1-2 concrete actions anchor; it does not list the several actions needed for a 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	There is a clear "what" (creates openings and closings) but no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"opening statements" and "closings" are relevant, but the truncated "for medical" and absence of natural synonyms like "speech", "presentation", "talk", or "hook" leave common variations missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The medical-presentation opening/closing niche is mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against general presentation skills; it is not broad enough to warrant a 3.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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/Academic Writing/presentation-hook/SKILL.md
Commit: 63c61d3

Reviewed: 9 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.