Name: quality-manager-qmr
Rating: 61.6 (1 reviews)
Author: alirezarezvani

quality-manager-qmr

Senior Quality Manager Responsible Person (QMR) for HealthTech and MedTech companies. Provides quality system governance, management review leadership, regulatory compliance oversight, and quality performance monitoring per ISO 13485 Clause 5.5.2. Use when leading management reviews, setting quality policy and objectives, monitoring quality KPIs and cost of quality, or exercising QMR governance and regulatory oversight responsibilities.

Quality

73%

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 ./.gemini/skills/quality-manager-qmr/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is quality-manager-qmr in alirezarezvani/claude-skills

Quality

Content

63%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.

A well-structured, actionable QMR reference with explicit validation checkpoints in every workflow. Its main weaknesses are duplicated management-review input content, missing validate-fix-retry feedback loops, and broken bundle-file references that undermine progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Create the referenced bundle files (references/management-review-guide.md, references/quality-kpi-framework.md, scripts/management_review_tracker.py) or remove the "See:" links so navigation is not broken.

De-duplicate the management-review inputs: keep one canonical listing and have the workflow, template, and quick-reference table all point to it instead of restating the same items three times.

Add explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loops to the compliance-monitoring and objective-review workflows (e.g., "If validation fails: correct the affected process and re-verify") to reach the anchor-5 workflow-clarity level.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient reference material (matrices, templates, KPI formulas) that does not re-explain basic concepts, but management-review inputs are restated three times (workflow step list, the fill-in input template, and the "Quick Reference: Management Review Inputs" table), so it could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete numbered workflows, copy-ready KPI calculation formulas, fill-in templates, and an explicit script invocation ("python management_review_tracker.py --help"); minor gaps remain because the referenced script and reference files do not actually exist in the bundle.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Each workflow is a clear numbered sequence ending in an explicit "Validation:" checkpoint, with an inspection-readiness checklist and escalation decision tree; falls short of anchor 5 because there are no validate-fix-retry feedback loops for error recovery.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Good surface structure (table of contents, well-labeled sections, one-level "See:" links), but the referenced files (references/management-review-guide.md, references/quality-kpi-framework.md, scripts/management_review_tracker.py) do not exist in the bundle, and substantial reference-grade content (long input template, KPI tables) is inlined rather than split out.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong, third-person description that clearly states both capabilities and use-when triggers with domain-specific keywords. It is distinct and specific, with only minor gaps in action granularity and synonym coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the QMR domain and lists several concrete actions ("quality system governance, management review leadership, regulatory compliance oversight, and quality performance monitoring"), but stops short of the granular multi-action coverage of the anchor-5 example.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what (governance/review/compliance/monitoring per ISO 13485 Clause 5.5.2) and when ("Use when leading management reviews... or exercising QMR governance"), with concrete trigger phrases matching the anchor-5 example.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Use when leading management reviews, setting quality policy and objectives, monitoring quality KPIs and cost of quality, or exercising QMR governance and regulatory oversight responsibilities" gives strong natural keyword coverage; a few common synonyms/variations are absent, so it sits just below the comprehensive anchor-5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The QMR role framed against HealthTech/MedTech + ISO 13485 is a clear niche with distinct triggers, but closely related sibling skills (quality-manager-qms-iso13485, capa-officer, qms-audit-expert) create minor overlap risk, matching anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

81%

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 — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 5 missing, 4 suspicious	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 7 missing	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Path: .gemini/skills/quality-manager-qmr/SKILL.md
Commit: 19392f7

Reviewed: ~2 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.