Name: lettria
Rating: 55.2 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

lettria

Lettria integration. Manage data, records, and automate workflows. Use when the user wants to interact with Lettria data.

Quality

62%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/lettria/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%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 body delivers strong, executable Membrane CLI guidance with a well-sequenced, validated connection workflow and clean section structure. Its weaknesses are mild verbosity (a promotional intro and a duplicated section) and the lack of any Lettria-specific action example or result verification step.

Suggestions

Remove the promotional intro paragraph and the redundant 'Popular actions' section (which repeats the action-list command) to tighten token efficiency.

Add one concrete Lettria-specific example showing a real action id and a realistic --input payload so the guidance is fully copy-paste ready.

Add a brief verification step after `membrane action run` / proxy requests (e.g. check the `output` field for errors before reporting success) to close the workflow validation gap.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with concrete commands, but the promotional intro paragraph ("Lettria is a text analytics platform that helps businesses extract insights...") and the redundant "Popular actions" section that re-states the discovery command already shown are unnecessary padding, fitting 'Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened.' Not a 4 because the duplicated command and filler line ('Use action names and parameters as needed.') are noticeable excess; not a 2 because the bulk is lean executable guidance.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete copy-paste-ready commands cover the common workflow (login, connection ensure, action list/run, proxy with a full flags table), matching 'Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps.' Not a 5 because examples stay generic (placeholders like CONNECTION_ID, {'key':'value'}) with no Lettria-specific action example showing real parameters, and the 'Popular actions' section offers no actual popular actions.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The connection setup is a clear sequenced workflow with feedback loops (poll with --wait, branch on READY/BUILDING/CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED/CONFIGURATION_ERROR, re-poll after the user acts), matching 'Clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps.' Not a 5 because the cross-reference 'skip to Step 2' points to an unlabeled step and there is no result verification after running actions or proxy requests.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The content is well-organized into clear section headers (Overview, Working with Lettria, Install, Authentication, Connecting, Searching, Running actions, Proxy, Best practices) with no nested references, fitting 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps.' Not a 5 because the file exceeds the ~50-line simple-skill threshold and the redundant 'Popular actions' section is a minor organization gap rather than a clean overview.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

57%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 correctly includes both a capability statement and an explicit 'Use when' trigger, and the named platform gives it reasonable distinctiveness. Its main weakness is generic, non-concrete action language that fails to surface the actual text-analytics tasks users would request.

Suggestions

Replace the generic verbs with concrete Lettria capabilities, e.g. 'Run sentiment analysis, topic extraction, named entity recognition, and text summarization on text via Lettria.'

Expand the trigger to mention the natural task terms users say, e.g. 'Use when the user wants to analyze text, extract insights, or run NLP tasks (sentiment, NER, topics) with Lettria.'

Add the file/extension or API surface cue (e.g. customer feedback, survey text) to sharpen trigger distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase "Manage data, records, and automate workflows" names the domain (Lettria) but the actions are generic abstractions rather than concrete capabilities, matching the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic.' It is not a 3 because none of the actions are concrete (e.g. no mention of sentiment analysis, NER, topic extraction), and not a 1 because the domain is named with a few action verbs.	2 / 5
Completeness	Both a 'what' ("Manage data, records, and automate workflows") and an explicit 'when' ("Use when the user wants to interact with Lettria data") are present, fitting 'Has both what and when; when could be more explicit or specific.' Not a 5 because the 'what' is generic and the 'when' lacks concrete trigger phrases tied to actual text-analytics tasks.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The brand keyword "Lettria" and the trigger phrase "Use when the user wants to interact with Lettria data" give some relevant keywords, but natural phrases users would actually say (text analytics, NLP, sentiment analysis) are missing, matching 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms.' Not a 4 because the trigger vocabulary is generic ('interact with data') rather than covering the task-specific terms users would invoke.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Naming the specific platform "Lettria" gives the skill a clear niche and low conflict risk against unrelated skills, matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills.' Not a 5 because the generic verbs (manage data, automate workflows) could still overlap with other data/integration skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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: membranedev/application-skills
Path: skills/lettria/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 6 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.