CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

western-blot-quantifier

Automatically identify Western Blot gel bands, perform densitometric analysis, and calculate normalized values relative to loading controls.

52

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Data Analysis/western-blot-quantifier/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body contains genuinely useful domain material (parameters, output format, algorithm, error handling), but it is buried under duplicated template boilerplate and its code examples do not match the actual packaged script. Consolidating the duplicated sections, fixing the script API mismatch, and moving secondary material to reference files would address the weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Fix the API mismatch: scripts/main.py defines WBQuantifier (and __init__.py's import of WesternBlotQuantifier fails), while every example imports WesternBlotQuantifier and mixes lane_count with the documented lane_positions parameter — align examples with the real entry point so they are copy-paste executable.

Delete the duplicated/boilerplate sections: three install blocks (Dependencies, Installation, Prerequisites), the broken "See `## Features`/`## Usage`/`## Workflow` above" cross-references, and redundant When-to-Use/Key-Features/Implementation-Details filler that restate the description.

Split secondary content (Examples, Algorithm Description, Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) into one-level-deep reference files with clear links from SKILL.md, keeping only quick-start usage, parameters, and output format inline.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~320-line body is noticeably verbose: install instructions appear three times ("## Dependencies", "## Installation", "## Prerequisites"), and template boilerplate sections ("Key Features", "Example Usage", "Implementation Details") mostly contain filler like "See `## Features` above for related details" with broken forward references. It is not 1 because the parameter table, algorithm description, and output format sections are substantive domain content rather than generic padding.

2 / 5

Actionability

There is concrete code (Python API examples, CLI invocation, py_compile checks) and a parameter table, but the examples are not executable against the actual bundle: they import "WesternBlotQuantifier" while scripts/main.py defines "WBQuantifier", and examples pass "lane_count" while the documented parameter is "lane_positions". This fits the some-concrete-but-incomplete anchor rather than anchor 4's mostly-executable guidance.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step Workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit validation and fallback checkpoints ("stop early if the task would require unsupported assumptions", "If execution fails or inputs are incomplete, switch to the fallback path"), plus a Quick Check compile step. It is not 5 because the checkpoints are stated generically rather than anchored to concrete validation commands per step, leaving minor validation gaps.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body has extensive section structure and the referenced script paths (scripts/__init__.py, scripts/main.py) are real bundle files, but everything — examples, algorithm details, security checklist, risk assessment, lifecycle status — is inlined in one ~320-line SKILL.md that should be split into reference files, and navigation signals are unreliable (broken "See above" references and "primary implementation surface: scripts/__init__.py" when main.py is the entry point). This matches the some-structure-but-could-be-better-organized anchor.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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 is specific and distinctive with good domain trigger terms, but it omits any "Use when..." trigger guidance, which both caps completeness and weakens its discoverability. Adding a trigger clause with common synonyms (densitometry, band intensity, blot quantification, image formats) would raise it substantially.

Suggestions

Append a trigger clause such as: "Use when analyzing Western Blot images, quantifying band intensity, or performing densitometry on gel/blot images (.png, .tif, .jpg)."

Include natural synonym phrases users say — "quantify band intensity", "blot quantification", "normalize to GAPDH/β-actin" — to broaden trigger term coverage.

Optionally mention output (CSV quantification results) to close the specificity gap between the description and the body's Features section.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists three concrete actions — "identify Western Blot gel bands", "perform densitometric analysis", and "calculate normalized values relative to loading controls" — which matches the anchor for several specific actions with minor gaps. It is not 5 because output/export and image-preprocessing capabilities from the body are not covered.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clearly stated (band identification, densitometry, normalization to loading controls) but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. It is not 2 because the "what" is concrete and specific rather than vague.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong domain keywords users would naturally say: "Western Blot", "gel bands", "densitometric analysis", "loading controls". A few natural terms are missing — "densitometry", "band intensity", and image file extensions (.png, .tif) — so it fits good-coverage-with-gaps rather than comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Western Blot gel bands" and "densitometric analysis... relative to loading controls" define a clear niche with distinct triggers; virtually no other skill category would claim these terms, matching the clear-niche anchor. There is no neighboring anchor that fits better.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
aipoch/medical-research-skills
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.