response-tone-polisher

Polishes response letters by transforming defensive or harsh language.

Quality

33%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./scientific-skills/Academic Writing/response-tone-polisher/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

32%

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 use case (improving tone in response letters) but is too brief and lacks explicit trigger guidance. It would benefit from listing specific transformations performed and adding a 'Use when...' clause to help Claude distinguish this from general writing or editing skills.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'soften tone', 'rewrite response', 'customer complaint reply', 'professional letter'

Expand specific actions: e.g., 'softens defensive phrasing, removes harsh language, adds empathetic acknowledgments, maintains professional tone'

Include natural user phrases like 'make this less aggressive', 'tone down', 'more diplomatic', 'customer-friendly'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (response letters) and one action (transforming defensive/harsh language), but lacks comprehensive detail about what specific transformations occur or what the output looks like.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (polishes response letters) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant terms like 'response letters', 'defensive', 'harsh language', but misses common variations users might say like 'tone', 'soften', 'professional', 'rewrite', or 'customer response'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Somewhat specific to response letters and tone transformation, but could overlap with general writing/editing skills or customer service communication skills without clearer boundaries.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

35%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill suffers from severe bloat with extensive boilerplate sections that don't serve the core purpose of tone polishing. The transformation examples and polite expression library are genuinely useful and actionable, but they're buried in repetitive procedural content. The skill would be significantly more effective at roughly 1/3 its current length, focusing on the transformation patterns and examples.

Suggestions

Remove or relocate boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) that don't directly support tone polishing

Consolidate redundant sections - merge 'When to Use', 'Overview', and 'Key Features' into a single brief introduction

Integrate the Quality Checklist into the workflow as explicit validation steps after polishing

Remove generic workflow/error handling boilerplate and replace with tone-polishing-specific guidance (e.g., what to do when polishing removes too much assertiveness)

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose with significant redundancy. Contains multiple sections that repeat the same information (e.g., 'When to Use', 'Overview', 'Workflow' all overlap). Includes boilerplate sections like 'Risk Assessment', 'Security Checklist', 'Lifecycle Status' that add little value for this text transformation task. The skill explains concepts Claude already knows (what defensive language is, basic Python usage).	1 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete transformation examples in the table format which are useful and actionable. However, the Python API example references a module that may not exist as shown, and the command-line examples assume a specific file structure without verification. The transformation patterns are helpful but the actual implementation details are vague.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The workflow section exists but is generic boilerplate not specific to tone polishing. The actual polishing process lacks clear validation steps - there's a 'Quality Checklist' at the end but it's not integrated into the workflow. No feedback loop for iterating on polish quality or handling edge cases where meaning might be lost.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References external files (references/polite_expressions.json, references/tone_patterns.md) appropriately, but the main document is a monolithic wall of text with excessive inline content. Many sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) could be moved to separate files or removed entirely. The structure exists but content is poorly distributed.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 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: 4a48721

Reviewed: about 12 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.