visual-content-desc

Generates detailed text descriptions of medical images and charts for.

Quality

30%

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/visual-content-desc/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.

This description is incomplete and appears truncated mid-sentence ('for.' ends abruptly). While it identifies the medical imaging domain, it lacks explicit trigger guidance, comprehensive action listing, and natural keyword variations that would help Claude select this skill appropriately.

Suggestions

Complete the truncated sentence and add a 'Use when...' clause with specific triggers like 'medical image', 'X-ray', 'MRI', 'CT scan', 'radiology', 'diagnostic imaging'

Expand the action list to include specific capabilities like 'describe X-rays, interpret chart data, summarize diagnostic findings, explain medical visualizations'

Clarify what type of 'charts' this handles (medical charts vs data charts) to reduce conflict risk with general data visualization skills

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (medical images and charts) and one action (generates detailed text descriptions), but the description appears truncated ('for.' ends abruptly) and doesn't list comprehensive actions.	2 / 3
Completeness	The description appears truncated and incomplete ('for.' ends mid-sentence). It partially addresses 'what' but completely lacks any 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'medical images' and 'charts' that users might say, but missing common variations like 'X-ray', 'MRI', 'scan', 'radiology', 'diagnostic images', or 'medical visualization'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The medical domain provides some specificity, but 'charts' is ambiguous (could conflict with data visualization skills) and 'images' is broad. The truncated ending further reduces clarity.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

27%

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 template bloat, containing extensive boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) that add no value for the actual task of describing medical images. The core functionality—how to generate quality descriptions of microscopy images, charts, or scans—is barely addressed, with no concrete examples showing input-to-output mappings. The document prioritizes process documentation over actionable guidance.

Suggestions

Remove boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Lifecycle Status, Evaluation Criteria) that don't provide actionable guidance for medical image description

Add 2-3 concrete examples showing actual medical images (or descriptions of them) mapped to expected output descriptions, alt text, and figure legends

Fix broken internal references ('See ## Features above' should reference content that actually appears above, not below)

Consolidate the workflow into a single, specific sequence for medical image description rather than generic skill execution boilerplate

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Extremely verbose with excessive boilerplate, redundant sections (e.g., 'See ## Features above' when Features is below), and unnecessary meta-content like Risk Assessment tables, Security Checklists, and Lifecycle Status that don't add actionable value for this simple skill.	1 / 3
Actionability	Provides some concrete elements like the output JSON schema and input parameters table, but the core task—how to actually generate medical image descriptions—lacks executable code or specific examples showing input images mapped to output descriptions.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Contains a numbered workflow but it's generic boilerplate applicable to any skill. Missing specific validation steps for medical image description quality, no examples of the actual description generation process, and no feedback loops for verifying description accuracy.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Monolithic wall of text with poor organization—references to sections that appear later ('See ## Features above' when Features is below), circular references, and no clear hierarchy. Content that should be in separate files (security checklist, evaluation criteria) is inline.	1 / 3
	Total	6 / 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 15 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.