CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

skill-researcher

Comprehensive research toolkit for discovering patterns, best practices, and technical knowledge across Web search, MCP servers, GitHub repositories, and documentation. Use when researching technologies, exploring codebases, finding examples, or gathering requirements for skill development.

59

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/skill-researcher/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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.

A thorough, well-sequenced research skill with concrete examples and real bundle files, but it is heavily padded and inlines much of the detail already covered by its references. Trimming the boilerplate and linking references inline per operation would materially improve it.

Suggestions

Cut the repeated Common Issues / Tips / Expected Outcome / Validation boilerplate per operation; move generic search and credibility heuristics (already known to Claude) into the reference files and keep SKILL.md to the distinctive steps and one concrete example per operation.

Replace the single end-of-file 'see the references/ directory' pointer with inline links at each operation (e.g., Operation 1 → references/web-search-strategies.md) so navigation is one level deep and clearly signaled.

Move the full markdown synthesis template and per-operation worked examples into their reference files, leaving SKILL.md as a concise overview that points to them, to reduce duplication between the body and the bundle.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~930-line body is noticeably verbose: each of five operations carries eight boilerplate subsections (When to Use, Prerequisites, Steps, Example, Expected Outcome, Validation, Common Issues, Tips) and repeats credibility/search heuristics Claude already knows; not a 1 because concrete query examples and templates still earn their place.

2 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-pasteable search queries, GitHub search syntax, real documentation URLs, full markdown synthesis templates, and a referenced automation script; minor gaps remain where steps stay abstract ('Extract Key Information', 'Evaluate Credibility').

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Each operation has a clear numbered 1-5 sequence plus a validation checklist and Common Issues recovery guidance; not a 5 because the validation is a post-hoc checklist rather than integrated mid-flow checkpoints with explicit validate→fix→retry loops.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Bundle files exist and are referenced, but only via a generic pointer at the end ('see the references/ directory') rather than inline links per operation, and the operations heavily inline detailed content that duplicates the scope of the reference files; fits 'references present but not clearly signaled; content that should be separate is inline'.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

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, well-structured description that clearly states both capability and triggers across concrete source types in third person. Minor room to sharpen action verbs and add synonym/extension variants for broader trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the research domain and four concrete sources (Web search, MCP servers, GitHub repositories, documentation) and what it discovers (patterns, best practices, technical knowledge), matching the 'lists several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; not a 5 because the actions remain somewhat abstract ('discovering') rather than fully concrete operations.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (research toolkit for discovering patterns across four named sources) and 'when' (Use when researching technologies, exploring codebases, finding examples, gathering requirements for skill development) with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ('researching technologies', 'exploring codebases', 'finding examples', 'gathering requirements') plus source keywords, giving good coverage; not a 5 because it lacks synonym/file-extension variety.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to research for skill development across specific sources, making it mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk (e.g., 'exploring codebases' could overlap general code-exploration skills); not a 5 due to that residual overlap.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (937 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
fernandezbaptiste/Skrillz
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.