memory-literary-analysis

Analyze a complete literary work into a structured Basic Memory knowledge graph. Covers schema design, entity seeding, chapter-by-chapter processing, cross-referencing, validation, and graph exploration.

Quality

74%

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 ./skills/memory-literary-analysis/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%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.

An exceptionally actionable, well-sequenced pipeline skill with real validation feedback loops, undermined by monolithic structure and notable repetition of the paging and path-scoping warnings. The non-obvious Basic Memory operational knowledge (page-size caps, .txt vs .md line offsets, grep row limits) earns its tokens; the duplication and inlined schema boilerplate do not.

Suggestions

Move the six full schema write_note definitions (~170 lines of Phase 0) into a references/schemas.md file and keep only one exemplar schema plus a summary table inline, adding pointers like "See [schemas.md](references/schemas.md)".

Extract the jq chapter-inventory coverage script and the bm find/grep semantics details into a references/validation.md or references/bm-queries.md, leaving the workflow and the two headline rules in the body.

Deduplicate the "--page-size caps at 200 / --name cannot combine with --meta / positional path scoping" material, which appears nearly verbatim in both the Tools section and Coverage Checks — state it once in Tools and cross-reference from Coverage Checks.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient, high-value operational knowledge (paging caps, POSIX read verbs, offset maps), but the "--page-size 200" warning recurs four times (Tools, Phase 3, Coverage Checks, Phase 5) and the "--name cannot combine with --meta" / path-boundary-scoping explanation is repeated nearly verbatim in the Tools section and Coverage Checks. Anchor 4 requires only minor trimming; this level of duplication keeps it at 3.	3 / 5
Actionability	Fully executable guidance throughout: complete write_note/edit_note templates with metadata and content, concrete bm CLI invocations ("bm cat ... --lines 4200-4890 --plain"), and a copy-paste-ready bash+jq pagination loop that walks pages until has_more is false and reports missing/duplicates/out_of_range. Placeholders like <Character Name> are inherent to a template for any literary work, not gaps.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clearly sequenced Phase 0-5 pipeline with a dedicated validation phase (schema_validate, schema_diff, coverage checks, sequence-gap detection with feedback loops: "fix the spelling or add the alias, then re-run the chapter"; "Fix issues found") and an explicit "Validate periodically... after each batch" guideline. For a batch operation this matches the anchor-5 example with checkpoints and error-recovery loops.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-sectioned with clear headers and a coherent phase flow, but there are no bundle files at all (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist) and ~740 lines are inlined monolithically: six full schema write_note definitions (~170 lines) and the long jq coverage-check script clearly belong in separate reference files. This matches anchor 3 — structure present, but content that should be separate is inline.	3 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

71%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, specific description that clearly names the domain and enumerates the full pipeline, weakened only by a missing explicit "when to use" trigger clause and absent genre synonyms that users would naturally say. It is plainly third-person and free of fluff.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when analyzing a novel, play, or poetry collection into Basic Memory, or when building a study/book-club companion knowledge base for a literary text."

Include natural synonyms users would say — novel, book, play, poem, non-fiction — rather than only the generic "literary work".

Mention the scale trigger (~200+ notes, 1000+ relations) from the body's "When to Use" section to sharpen distinctiveness against generic note-taking skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists six concrete actions covering the full pipeline — "schema design, entity seeding, chapter-by-chapter processing, cross-referencing, validation, and graph exploration" — which matches the comprehensive-coverage anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor at 4.	5 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clearly and concretely stated, but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural domain terms are present ("literary work", "knowledge graph", "Basic Memory") and a user could plausibly say them, but common genre synonyms a user would actually say — novel, book, play, poem, close reading — are missing, so it does not reach the comprehensive synonym coverage of anchor 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of "Basic Memory knowledge graph" with literary analysis is a clear niche with distinct triggers, though it sits within a family of related memory-* skills (memory-ingest, memory-schema, memory-notes) creating minor overlap risk, matching anchor 4 rather than the minimal-conflict anchor 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (743 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: basicmachines-co/basic-memory
Path: skills/memory-literary-analysis/SKILL.md
Commit: 194afe1

Reviewed: 7 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.