CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

auto-research

Deep strategic research engine — decomposes questions into parallel research threads, spawns multiple agents, and synthesizes into actionable strategic analysis

55

Quality

62%

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 ./.claude/skills/auto-research/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill is highly actionable with ready-to-use templates and a well-sequenced 4-phase workflow, but it is somewhat verbose and the parallel-agent batch lacks a robust validation/retry feedback loop. Tightening repetition and adding a stronger agent-failure recovery loop would raise the lowest dimensions.

Suggestions

Consolidate the emerging-tech guidance into one location instead of repeating it across Phase 1, the agent methodology, and the synthesis section to improve conciseness.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop for failed or low-quality research threads (beyond a single retry) to lift workflow clarity past the batch-operation cap.

Extract the agent prompt template and/or synthesis document template into a references/ file and link to it from the main body to improve progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient operational guidance with concrete templates, but the emerging-tech emphasis is repeated across Phase 1 thread 7, the agent methodology, and the synthesis section, and the body (~228 lines) could be tightened; not a 3 because of this redundancy, not a 1 because it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready artifacts: a full agent prompt template, a synthesis document template with frontmatter, explicit file save paths ('05-knowledge/research/YYYY-MM-DD-[slug].md'), and the 'research-[thread-slug]' naming convention; matches the anchor for fully executable, specific guidance.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 4-phase sequence with timings and a user confirmation checkpoint is clear, but spawning 5-7 parallel agents is a batch operation whose only recovery is 'retry once with alternative search terms' — no validate→fix→retry loop — so per the feedback-loops guideline workflow clarity is capped at 2; not a 3 because the batch feedback loop is missing.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clear sections with no nested references and no bundle files present, but the agent prompt template and synthesis template are inline in a 228-line monolith that could be split into reference files; not a 3 because content that could be separate remains inline.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

60%

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 concretely states what the skill does but omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps both completeness and trigger-term quality. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural user phrases would lift the weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause naming natural user phrases such as 'research', 'investigate', 'strategic analysis', or 'deep dive into [topic]' so completeness and trigger-term quality reach 3.

Lead with the trigger context before the capability list to make the 'when' explicit and reduce overlap with generic analysis skills.

Keep the concrete action verbs (decompose, spawn, synthesize) — they already support a strong specificity score.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — 'decomposes questions into parallel research threads', 'spawns multiple agents', 'synthesizes into actionable strategic analysis' — matching the anchor for listing several specific actions; not a 2 because it goes beyond naming just a domain and one action.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what' (decompose, spawn, synthesize) but has no 'Use when...' trigger clause, so per the guidelines completeness is capped at 2; not a 3 because the 'when' is entirely absent from the description.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains 'research' and 'strategic analysis' but omits common natural variations users would say ('investigate', 'deep dive', 'market analysis'); not a 3 because coverage is partial, not a 1 because some natural keywords are present.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The strategic-research niche is fairly distinct, but without explicit trigger terms in the description it could still overlap with general research or analysis skills; not a 3 because distinctiveness rests on niche alone rather than clear distinct triggers.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
huytieu/COG-second-brain
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.