marketing-claims-review

Review marketing copy for claims that need substantiation, reframing, or cutting. Use when the user says "review this marketing copy", "check these claims", "can we say this", "is this puffery or a problem", or pastes marketing content (landing pages, emails, ads, taglines).

Quality

88%

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

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

A well-structured, highly actionable legal-claims review workflow with explicit validation gates and copy-paste output templates. Its weaknesses are verbosity (lengthy policy/taxonomy prose that could be tightened) and a monolithic single-file structure with no progressive disclosure despite content that would benefit from reference files.

Suggestions

Move the source-attribution-tiering policy and the full claim-taxonomy reference tables into a separate reference file (e.g. references/claim-taxonomy.md), keeping SKILL.md an overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep links to improve progressive_disclosure.

Tighten the multi-paragraph blockquotes under 'Research the applicable standards' (the 'No silent supplement' and 'Source attribution tiering' sections) into concise rules or a short table, removing explanatory prose Claude can infer, to improve conciseness.

Consider extracting the disclosure-overlay regime details into a reference file and keeping only a one-line pointer in SKILL.md, since that material is conditional rather than needed on every run.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense and includes lengthy policy prose (the source-attribution tiering blockquotes, the claim-taxonomy explanations) that explains specialized-but-partly-known concepts rather than purely instructing, so it could be tightened rather than scoring as lean and efficient.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides copy-paste-ready output templates with exact field structure, concrete fix patterns in tables ('99.9% uptime (with SLA that defines it)'), and a five-step review process, matching the 'fully executable... copy-paste ready' anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The four-step review is clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates — the 'Ready to ship: Yes' approval gate and the 'if you cannot verify the current standard, flag for attorney verification' feedback loop — matching the 'explicit validation steps; feedback loops' anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and all content (citation-tiering policy, disclosure-overlay regimes, taxonomy, output templates) is inline in a single ~210-line SKILL.md with content that could be split into reference files, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor rather than a well-signaled one-level reference structure.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 concrete actions and provides multiple natural trigger phrases plus asset-type examples. It fully answers both 'what' and 'when' and occupies a distinct niche unlikely to conflict with other skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names multiple concrete actions tied to a clear domain — 'claims that need substantiation, reframing, or cutting' — which matches the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than the 'some actions' level below.	3 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what ('Review marketing copy for claims...') and when ('Use when the user says...') with explicit triggers, satisfying the highest anchor rather than capping at 2.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes natural phrasings users would actually say ('review this marketing copy', 'check these claims', 'can we say this', 'is this puffery or a problem') plus asset types, giving good coverage rather than missing common variations.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The marketing-claims legal-review niche with distinct triggers ('puffery', 'substantiation', 'landing pages, emails, ads, taglines') is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 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: anthropics/claude-for-legal
Path: product-legal/skills/marketing-claims-review/SKILL.md
Commit: 4a6c651

Reviewed: 6 days 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.