investor-research

Research VCs, angels, and investors - portfolio, thesis, contact info

Quality

60%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/research/capabilities/investor-research/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

53%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 is a well-structured, mostly lean walkthrough of an investor-research workflow, but its curl examples are not executable as written due to broken JSON quoting, and the workflow lacks any validation or error-recovery checkpoints. Fixing the command syntax and adding verification steps would most improve the score.

Suggestions

Fix the curl JSON payloads so each -d argument is a single complete quoted JSON object (the 'searchParams'/'query' blocks currently fall outside the closing quote), making every example copy-paste executable.

Add validation/feedback checkpoints between steps, e.g. confirm investor-search results match the target space before pulling contacts, and verify an email was found before drafting outreach.

Trim the 'Example Usage' section to only cases not already covered by the workflow, and repair the malformed 'Discover More' curl block at the end of the file.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and command-forward, but the 'Example Usage' section repeats near-identical curl calls already shown in the workflow and the 'Discover More' section contains stray/malformed tokens, so it could be tightened. It is not a 4 because of this redundancy and the broken trailing block.	3 / 5
Actionability	Each step ships a concrete curl command, but the JSON payloads are malformed: the -d string closes with '}' before 'searchParams'/'query' continue on later lines, so the examples are not copy-paste executable as written. This matches the 'concrete guidance but incomplete / not executable' anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	There is a clear four-step sequence (search → portfolio → contacts → email) but no validation checkpoints, error handling, or feedback loops (e.g. confirming an investor match before emailing a partner). Steps are listed but checkpoints are missing, matching the score-3 anchor.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a single file with well-organized sections (Setup, Workflow, Example Usage, Tips, Discover More) and no nested external references; there are no bundle files to split out. It is 4 rather than 5 because some inlined example/discovery curls read like API reference material that could live in a separate file.	4 / 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 is concise and names a clear niche with concrete deliverables and natural trigger terms, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' guidance, which caps completeness. Adding a trigger clause and a couple of synonyms would lift it noticeably.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when fundraising, preparing investor outreach, or researching VCs/angels before a round.'

Include natural synonyms such as 'venture capital', 'funding', and 'fundraising' to improve trigger-term coverage.

Lead with concrete action verbs ('Find and profile...', 'Pull portfolio and contact info for...') to push specificity from 4 toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Research VCs, angels, and investors - portfolio, thesis, contact info" names the domain plus several concrete deliverables (portfolio, thesis, contact info), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor. It does not reach 5 because it lacks concrete action verbs/methods beyond 'Research'.	4 / 5
Completeness	There is a clear 'what' (research investors, portfolio, thesis, contact info) but no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger clause, so per the judging guideline a missing explicit 'when' caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"VCs, angels, and investors" are natural terms users actually say, giving good keyword coverage. It stays at 4 rather than 5 because synonyms like 'venture capital', 'funding', 'fundraising', or 'limited partners' are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The investor-research niche with 'VCs, angels, and investors' is mostly distinct from other skills with only minor overlap risk against generic research skills. Not 5 because 'investors' alone could brush against broader fundraising/finance skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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/research/capabilities/investor-research/SKILL.md
Commit: 2523432

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.