CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

thermo-free-energy-and-reporting

Use this skill for thermodynamic and free-energy post-processing, result normalization, and concise reporting standards for catalyst comparison.

Quality

69%

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 ./skills/thermo-free-energy-and-reporting/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 compact, well-structured instruction-only skill with a clear three-stage workflow and an explicit input-filtering checkpoint. Its weaknesses are triple repetition of the convention rules (hurting conciseness) and guidance that stays at the checklist level without formulas, an example table, or specific correction details that would make it truly actionable.

Suggestions

Merge 'Method-critical defaults' into Workflow step 2 (or vice versa) so each convention rule is stated once, cutting the triple repetition also echoed in the Output Contract.

Add one concrete artifact: a minimal example comparison table showing columns (entry, energy, convention, units) or the explicit adsorption/free-energy equations with the reference-state convention spelled out.

Replace the empty 'Suggested tools: (none specified)' section and the vague closing 'References' note with either real pointers or nothing, since both add tokens without guidance.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The bullets are lean with no padded explanations, but the convention rules ('Do not mix... without labeling', 'Keep reference states... fixed') are stated three times across Workflow step 2, 'Method-critical defaults', and the Output Contract, so the body could be tightened by merging those sections.

3 / 5

Actionability

The process checklist is followable (exclude unconverged structures, fix one convention, table with units and artifact paths), but as an instruction-only skill it provides no formula, worked example table, or specific correction detail, leaving key execution details missing.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The gather-apply-report sequence is clearly numbered with an explicit input-validation checkpoint ('Gather only validated energies', 'Exclude unconverged or obviously pathological structures'), but there is no final output-verification loop, so only most checkpoints are present.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is under 50 lines, needs no external references (none exist in the bundle), and is organized under clear section headers, which the rubric's simple-skill provision scores as fully appropriate structure.

5 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 moderately good description: it names a clear niche domain and includes an explicit 'Use this skill for' trigger clause, but the actions described are generic process terms and it lacks the natural vocabulary variations (adsorption energy, DFT, Gibbs free energy) users would actually say. The when-clause restates the what rather than giving user-side triggers.

Suggestions

Rewrite the trigger clause to be user-side and concrete, e.g. 'Use when comparing catalysts, building free-energy diagrams, or normalizing DFT/electronic-structure energies for a ranking table.'

Add natural synonyms users would say: 'adsorption energy', 'Gibbs free energy', 'DFT results', 'free-energy diagram', 'catalyst ranking'.

Replace generic process words ('post-processing', 'normalization') with concrete actions such as 'convert raw slab/adsorbate/gas energies into adsorption or free-energy values with one reference convention, then output a comparison table with units'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ("thermodynamic and free-energy post-processing") and actions ("result normalization", "concise reporting standards"), but these are generic process words rather than concrete operations, matching 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'.

3 / 5

Completeness

"Use this skill for..." provides explicit trigger guidance and the what (post-processing, normalization, reporting) is clear, but the when merely restates the what with no user-side phrasing, so it 'could be more explicit or specific'.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant natural keywords like "thermodynamic", "free-energy", and "catalyst comparison", but misses common variations users would say such as "adsorption energy", "DFT results", "Gibbs free energy", or "free-energy diagram".

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The catalyst free-energy comparison niche is mostly distinct, but generic terms like "post-processing" and "normalization" carry minor overlap risk with adjacent DFT/thermo-analysis skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

fernandezbaptiste/CatMaster

Path

skills/thermo-free-energy-and-reporting/SKILL.md

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.