CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

documentation-research

Enforces documentation research before implementation. Auto-loads when implementing features to ensure current best practices are followed. Researches official docs first.

57

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/python-experts/skills/documentation-research/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Discovery

35%

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 communicates a general purpose (research docs before coding) but lacks specificity about concrete actions and natural trigger terms users would use. It relies on process-oriented language ('auto-loads', 'enforces') rather than describing tangible capabilities or explicit usage triggers.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms like 'implement', 'add feature', 'how do I use [library]', 'check the docs', 'API reference'

Include specific concrete actions such as 'searches official documentation', 'extracts code examples', 'identifies current API patterns', 'summarizes library usage'

Specify what types of documentation or technologies this covers (e.g., 'framework docs', 'API references', 'library documentation') to improve distinctiveness

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (documentation research) and some actions ('enforces', 'auto-loads', 'researches'), but lacks concrete specific actions like what kind of features, what documentation sources, or what outputs are produced.

2 / 3

Completeness

Describes what it does (enforces documentation research before implementation) but the 'when' is only implied through 'auto-loads when implementing features' rather than explicit trigger guidance. No 'Use when...' clause with user-facing triggers.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Uses technical/process jargon like 'auto-loads', 'best practices', 'official docs' rather than natural user terms. Missing keywords users would actually say like 'look up docs', 'check documentation', 'how to implement', or specific technology names.

1 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Implementing features' and 'best practices' are broad terms that could overlap with many coding, development, or documentation skills. The focus on 'documentation research' provides some distinction but isn't sharply defined.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Implementation

57%

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

This skill establishes a clear principle (research before implementation) with reasonable structure, but falls short on actionability by not showing concrete examples of the research workflow in action. The report template is helpful but the skill would benefit from an actual worked example demonstrating the full protocol with real tool usage.

Suggestions

Add a concrete example showing actual WebSearch/WebFetch usage for a specific technology lookup (e.g., 'Researching Django 5.0 authentication')

Include a validation checkpoint: what to do if official docs are unavailable, outdated, or conflicting with other sources

Show a complete worked example of the report format filled in with real data, not just placeholders

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary formatting (decorative box characters in report format) and the documentation sources table, while useful, lists information Claude could easily look up. The core content is mostly lean.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides a clear protocol and report template, but lacks concrete executable examples. No actual code showing how to use WebSearch/WebFetch, no example of a completed research workflow, and the steps are somewhat abstract ('Search Official Docs' without showing how).

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Steps are listed in sequence but lack validation checkpoints. The 'Ready to proceed?' prompt is good, but there's no guidance on what to do if documentation is unclear, conflicting, or unavailable. No feedback loop for incomplete research.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

For a skill of this size (~50 lines), the structure is appropriate. Clear sections with headers, a focused scope, and no need for external file references. Content is well-organized and easy to scan.

3 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

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

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
jpoutrin/product-forge
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.