CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

brief-market-topic

Use when turning a supplied market source, account excerpt, or industry item into an ICP-relevant messaging and research brief.

67

Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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.

A well-organized, instruction-only skill with concrete labeling conventions, a ready-to-use output template, a clear sequenced workflow, and a quality-check checkpoint. The main gaps are minor: some reinforcement redundancy, no worked filled example, and no explicit error-recovery feedback loop.

Suggestions

Add one short worked example showing a filled-in output (e.g., a sample Fact/Inference/Hypothesis table from a sample excerpt) to make the labeling scheme fully concrete.

Add an explicit feedback loop in the workflow or Quality check (e.g., 'if a claim cannot be mapped to source language, mark it Missing and re-derive the relevance') to lift workflow clarity.

Consolidate the repeated 'do not inflate one account into market demand' rule so it appears once authoritatively (e.g., in Guardrails) and is only referenced elsewhere.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with no padding or explanation of known concepts. It is not a 5 because the core 'do not inflate one account into market demand' rule is restated in Purpose, Guardrails, and Quality check, a minor redundancy that could be tightened.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance is provided via a defined labeling scheme (Fact/Inference/Supported/Hypothesis/Missing) and a copy-paste output template. It stops short of 5 because no filled worked example demonstrates the labeled output end-to-end.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Seven clearly sequenced steps plus a terminal Quality-check checklist give a clear sequence with a verification checkpoint. It is not 5 because there is no explicit fix-and-retry feedback loop (e.g., what to do when a fact fails to map to the source).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is single-purpose and self-contained with well-organized sections (Purpose, Required inputs, Workflow, Output format, Guardrails, Quality check, Example invocation) and no nested or buried references, so the simple-skill organization exception applies.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

82%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.

A strong, well-structured description that explicitly covers both what the skill does and when to invoke it, with concrete trigger phrases and a distinct niche. Its only weakness is that it describes a single transformation action rather than enumerating multiple specific capabilities.

Suggestions

Consider enumerating the distinct deliverables the brief produces (e.g., 'extract supported facts, derive pains/triggers/objections, draft hooks and counter-angles') to lift specificity from one action to several concrete actions.

Add a natural synonym or two for specialized terms (e.g., 'account or deal excerpt', 'research or messaging brief') to broaden trigger coverage beyond 'ICP' jargon.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the input domain (market source, account excerpt, industry item) and a single input-to-output transformation (into an ICP-relevant messaging and research brief), but does not list several distinct concrete actions. It is more than just naming the domain (score 2) yet falls short of multiple specific actions (score 4).

3 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what (turn a supplied source into an ICP-relevant messaging and research brief) and when (concrete 'Use when turning a supplied market source, account excerpt, or industry item into...' trigger phrases). The 'when' is explicit and concrete, so it clears the score-4 bar.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The 'Use when' clause surfaces several natural input triggers ('market source', 'account excerpt', 'industry item'), giving good keyword coverage. It stops short of comprehensive synonym/file-extension coverage (score 5) because 'ICP' is jargon and common variations are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is specific — producing ICP-relevant messaging/research briefs from supplied market sources — with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk versus generic skills. Related ICP/sales skills could share some vocabulary, but the framing is clearly differentiated.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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
llaskin/AI-SDR-Skill-Pack
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.