content-research-writer
Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section. Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:majiayu000/claude-skill-registry-data --skill content-research-writer68
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 98%
↑ 1.44xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
25%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 provides a reasonable list of capabilities but fails to include explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...'), which is critical for skill selection. The final sentence uses second-person voice and marketing language rather than actionable criteria. The scope is too broad and would likely conflict with other writing-related skills.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'write article', 'need citations', 'improve my draft', 'outline', 'research for writing'
Remove the marketing fluff sentence ('Transforms your writing process...') and replace with specific use cases or content types (e.g., 'articles, blog posts, essays')
Narrow the scope or add distinguishing details to differentiate from general editing/proofreading skills (e.g., specify 'long-form content' or 'research-backed articles')
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names domain (writing/content) and lists several actions (conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, providing feedback), but actions remain somewhat general and not fully concrete. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance. The final sentence is marketing fluff ('collaborative partnership') rather than actionable selection criteria. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords like 'writing', 'content', 'research', 'citations', 'outlines', but missing common variations users might say like 'draft', 'article', 'blog post', 'essay', 'edit', or 'proofread'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very generic 'writing' and 'content' focus would conflict with many other skills (editing, proofreading, blogging, academic writing, etc.). No clear niche or distinct triggers to differentiate it. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
27%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is excessively verbose, explaining concepts Claude already understands (writing structure, feedback principles, file organization). While it provides useful templates and example outputs, the content could be reduced by 70%+ without losing actionable value. The lack of progressive disclosure and validation checkpoints in workflows further weakens its utility.
Suggestions
Reduce content to ~100 lines by removing explanations of concepts Claude knows (what hooks are, why voice matters, basic file organization) and keeping only the specific templates and formats.
Split detailed content into separate files: CITATION_FORMATS.md, WORKFLOW_TEMPLATES.md, FEEDBACK_TEMPLATES.md, with SKILL.md as a concise overview with links.
Add validation checkpoints to workflows, e.g., 'After outline: confirm with user before proceeding to research' or 'After each section: verify feedback was addressed before moving on'.
Remove redundant sections (Pro Tips, Best Practices, Related Use Cases) that repeat information or state obvious guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. Explains obvious concepts Claude knows (what hooks are, how to organize files, basic writing workflows). The 'What This Skill Does' section lists capabilities Claude inherently has. Multiple redundant sections (Pro Tips, Best Practices, Related Use Cases) add little value. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides structured templates and example outputs, but most guidance is abstract instruction rather than executable code. The 'research' examples show output format but not how to actually conduct research. Shell commands for file setup are concrete but trivial. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multiple workflows are listed (Blog Post, Newsletter, Technical Tutorial) with numbered steps, but they lack validation checkpoints. No feedback loops for error recovery. Steps like 'Research key points' and 'Write introduction → get feedback' are vague about what constitutes success. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. Everything is inline despite being 400+ lines. Content that could be split (citation formats, workflow types, file organization) is all embedded. No clear navigation structure beyond headers. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (540 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.