study-limitations-drafter

Use study limitations drafter for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.

Quality

45%

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/study-limitations-drafter/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

42%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 skill is well-sectioned and points to real bundle files, but it is weighed down by redundant boilerplate sections, a parameter table that contradicts the bundled script's actual CLI, and abstract workflow steps lacking a concrete executable example.

Suggestions

Collapse the overlapping handling/output sections (Error Handling, Failure Handling, Input Validation, Output Requirements, Output Contract, Returns) into one concise section to cut padding.

Fix the Parameters table to match the script's real interface (--issues, --output) and add a copy-pasteable example such as `python scripts/main.py --issues sample_size,single_center -o limitations.md`.

Remove generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) or move it to the reference file so SKILL.md stays a lean overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~195-line body is noticeably padded with redundant overlapping sections (Error Handling / Failure Handling / Input Validation; Output Requirements / Output Contract / Returns) and generic boilerplate (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status), and even repeats the description string verbatim in 'When to Use'.	2 / 5
Actionability	Concrete validation commands and a Parameters table exist, but there is no executable usage example of the script and the documented parameters (limitations/severity/mitigation) do not match the script's real interface (--issues/--output).	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A 5-step Workflow with a compile/help validation checkpoint and a fallback path is present, but the steps are abstract and generic and the feedback loops remain implicit rather than concrete validate-fix-retry cycles.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	There is a clearly signaled, verified one-level reference (references/audit-reference.md) and a bundled script, but the overview is bloated by inlined generic boilerplate that could be trimmed or split out.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Description

48%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 identifies a distinct niche but leans on abstract process qualities instead of concrete capabilities and lacks an explicit 'Use when…' trigger clause. It is serviceable but generic for its domain.

Suggestions

Replace abstract qualities with concrete actions, e.g. 'Drafts professionally worded study limitation paragraphs from a list of design constraints, with severity and mitigation notes.'

Add an explicit trigger clause: 'Use when writing manuscript limitation sections, grant proposal risk assessments, or peer-review responses.'

Include natural synonyms users say ('limitations section', 'manuscript', 'peer review', 'grant proposal') to improve trigger term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ('study limitations drafter for academic writing workflows') but lists process qualities ('structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries') rather than concrete actions like drafting or generating limitation statements.	2 / 5
Completeness	It gives a moderately clear 'what' but only a weakly implied 'when' ('for academic writing workflows that need…') with no explicit 'Use when…' trigger clause, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes natural terms ('study limitations', 'academic writing') a user might say, but misses common variations and synonyms such as 'manuscript', 'limitations section', 'peer review', or 'grant'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Study limitations drafter' carves a clear academic-research niche with minor overlap risk only against other academic-writing skills; it is unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 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/study-limitations-drafter/SKILL.md
Commit: 63c61d3

Reviewed: 5 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.