company-funding-search

Find company funding history, investors, and investment details

Quality

64%

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/lead-generation/capabilities/company-funding-search/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

60%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 well-structured with concrete commands, clear API decision guidance, and sensible error handling, but it is undermined by placeholder-style empty api/path fields in the main commands, a GET-labeled polling step shown as POST, and noticeable redundancy across the When-to-Use, Error Handling, and Tips sections. Fixing the command placeholders and de-duplicating the guidance would raise both actionability and conciseness.

Suggestions

Fill in the real "api" and "path" values in the primary proxy commands (e.g. "api":"nyne","path":"/company/funding") so they are executable as written instead of shipping empty placeholder fields.

Fix the Step 2 polling example: it is labeled "(GET)" but uses curl -X POST — make the method, and the example, consistent.

Merge the "When to Use" list and "When to Use Which" table into one section, and consolidate the repeated Nyne-async and company_name-vs-domain tips that appear in both Error Handling and Tips.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	There is no padding over concepts Claude already knows, but the body repeats itself: the "When to Use" list and "When to Use Which" table cover the same ground, the Nyne async tip appears in both "Error Handling" and "Tips", the company_name > company_domain advice is stated twice, and the <details> blocks largely duplicate the primary commands. This could be noticeably tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete curl commands are provided throughout, but the primary proxy commands ship empty "api":"" and "path":"" fields so they do not specify which endpoint they hit, "Step 2: Poll for results (GET)" is shown as curl -X POST, and the curl equivalents omit the Authorization header and contain stray blank lines — real gaps that keep the commands from being copy-paste executable.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Nyne async sequence is clearly laid out (POST returns request_id, poll for 5-20 seconds) with 404/429 error guidance and a clear decision table between the two APIs; minor gaps remain, such as the GET/POST inconsistency and no guidance on poll retries or timeout, and operations are read-only so no destructive-validation cap applies.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	There are no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ absent) and the single-file skill is well organized with clear section headers, a decision table, and collapsible <details> blocks; minor organization gaps come from the duplicated decision-guidance sections and the broken formatting inside the <details> blocks.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 states a clear, concrete purpose in a distinct niche, but it omits any "when to use" trigger guidance and misses common natural phrasings (raised, Series B, VC, venture capital). It is serviceable but below the standard of the good examples, which pair capabilities with explicit trigger conditions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user asks how much funding a company raised, who invested in a company, or wants to find companies by funding stage (e.g. Series B AI startups)."

Include natural synonyms and phrasings users would actually say: "raised", "funding rounds", "Series A/B", "VCs", "venture capital".

Distinguish the two capabilities more explicitly in the description (looking up a known company vs. searching companies by funding criteria).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Find company funding history, investors, and investment details" names the domain and 2-3 actions, but they are all variants of a single lookup action rather than a comprehensive list of distinct capabilities.	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear (find funding history, investors, and investment details), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant keywords like "funding history" and "investors", but misses natural variations users would say such as "raised", "Series A/B", "VC", "venture capital", or "funding rounds".	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"Company funding history, investors, and investment details" defines a clear niche with minor overlap risk against general company-research skills; it lacks trigger phrasing that would make it fully distinct, keeping it below a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: gooseworks-ai/goose-skills
Path: skills/lead-generation/capabilities/company-funding-search/SKILL.md
Commit: cc3e518

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.