content-research-writer

Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section. Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership.

1.44x

Quality

61%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

98%

1.44x

Average score across 6 eval scenarios

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/all-skills/skills/content-research-writer/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

56%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 skill body is highly actionable thanks to concrete templates and worked examples and offers a clear sequenced workflow with built-in feedback loops, but it suffers from notable redundancy across overlapping workflow sections and keeps everything in a single long file with no progressive disclosure. Trimming repeated sections and moving large templates into reference files would substantially improve it.

Suggestions

Collapse the redundant process descriptions — 'Basic Workflow', 'Writing Workflows', and the process echoed in 'Examples' — into a single canonical sequenced workflow to remove padding.

Move the large inline templates (outline, section feedback, final-review) into one-level-deep reference files (e.g. TEMPLATES.md) and link to them from the body to improve progressive disclosure.

Delete the 'What This Skill Does' section, which restates the frontmatter description and adds no new actionable detail.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is noticeably verbose and padded: the same writing process is restated across 'Basic Workflow', 'Instructions', 'Writing Workflows', and 'Examples', and the 'What This Skill Does' section duplicates the frontmatter description, giving several unnecessary or repeated sections.	2 / 5
Actionability	It supplies concrete, copy-paste-ready templates (outline, research output, hook analysis, section feedback, citation formats, final-review checklist) alongside fully worked examples such as the rewritten hooks in Example 3 and the line-edited feedback in Example 4, with only minor gaps where templates remain placeholder scaffolding.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The main 'Instructions' section lays out a clear 8-step sequence with inherent feedback loops (review after each section, iterate on the outline) and a pre-publish checklist; because the skill is non-destructive the missing-validation cap does not apply, but redundant competing workflow descriptions slightly muddy the single canonical path.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The file is well-sectioned with clear headers, but it is a ~530-line monolith with several large inline template blocks (outline, feedback, final review) and no external reference files at all, so content that could be split into one-level-deep references is instead inlined.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 clearly conveys what the skill does through a strong list of concrete writing-assistance actions, but it lacks any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance and pads the action list with a generic lead and a marketing-style closing sentence. Adding concrete trigger phrases would lift completeness and distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Append an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when writing blog posts, articles, or newsletters, or when the user asks to add citations, improve hooks, or get section-by-section feedback.'

Drop the marketing sentence 'Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership' — it is an over-claim that adds no trigger value.

Include common content-type synonyms (blog, article, newsletter, draft, tutorial) so natural user phrasing matches the description.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description enumerates five concrete actions — 'conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section' — which is comprehensive, but the generic lead 'Assists in writing high-quality content' and the marketing-fluff closing sentence ('Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership') are minor gaps that keep it just below a clean 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly and concretely stated, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance — the 'when' is only weakly implied by the writing context — which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes several natural user-facing terms ('writing', 'research', 'citations', 'hooks', 'outlines', 'feedback'), but it omits common content-type synonyms a user would actually say such as 'blog post', 'article', 'newsletter', or 'draft', so coverage is good rather than comprehensive.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The research-plus-citations-plus-hooks-plus-section-feedback combination carves a fairly distinct niche that is unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, with only minor overlap risk against generic writing or editing skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (540 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: davepoon/buildwithclaude
Path: plugins/all-skills/skills/content-research-writer/SKILL.md
Commit: a9fa86d

Reviewed: about 19 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.