CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

webthinker-deep-research

Deep web research for VCO: multi-hop search+browse+extract with an auditable action trace and a structured report (WebThinker-style).

58

Quality

66%

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 ./bundled/skills/webthinker-deep-research/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 body is a well-structured, mostly lean operational guide with concrete commands, a real scaffold script, a clear multi-step workflow, and sensible quality gates. Its main weaknesses are a few high-level steps and the lack of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop.

Suggestions

Add an explicit verification feedback loop (e.g., "If a key claim cannot be triangulated across ≥2 sources, mark it unverified and re-search before finalizing report.md").

Move the Windows-specific vendored paths and runtime config into a separate reference file so SKILL.md stays platform-agnostic and leaner.

Tighten high-level steps like "Search (broad → narrow)" with one concrete example query-progression so the guidance is fully executable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and information-rich, assumes Claude's intelligence, and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, though the hardcoded Windows paths and the vendoring/runtime section contain minor padding that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable commands (the scaffold invocation, web.run search/open/click/find, mcp__tavily__tavily_search, playwright) and a real init script, but a few steps like "Search (broad → narrow)" and "Draft + iterate" remain high-level.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Mode A is a clear 5-step sequence (scaffold → search → browse/extract → draft/iterate → verify) with checkpoints like triangulation and uncertainty flagging, but it lacks an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clear sections with the only bundle file (scripts/init_webthinker_run.py) appropriately externalized and signaled, though the inlined vendoring/runtime detail could arguably live in a separate reference.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

58%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 gives a concrete, third-person account of what the skill does but omits any explicit "when to use" trigger guidance, capping completeness. It is specific and reasonably distinct, yet lacks the natural keyword variations a user would actually say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user asks for deep/multi-hop web research, a research report, or 调研报告, and an auditable source trace is required."

Include common natural synonyms and CJK trigger terms (research report, literature review, 竞品调研, 技术调研) directly in the description rather than only in the body.

Expand "search+browse+extract" into plainly listed actions so the capability set reads as comprehensive rather than compressed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and several concrete actions ("multi-hop search+browse+extract", "auditable action trace", "structured report"), but the action chain is compressed rather than fully enumerated, leaving minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (multi-hop search/browse/extract + trace + report), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant natural terms ("Deep web research", "multi-hop") but omits common variations users would actually say such as "research report", "literature review", or the CJK phrases ("调研报告") that appear only in the body.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The "multi-hop", "auditable action trace", and "WebThinker-style" framing carve a distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against simpler research/search skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
foryourhealth111-pixel/Vibe-Skills
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.