CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

academic-cv-builder

Format CVs for academic positions with publications, grants, and teaching

35

Quality

30%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/academic-cv-builder/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

27%

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

This skill reads more like a comprehensive academic CV writing guide than a concise skill file for Claude. It extensively explains concepts Claude already knows (what sections go in a CV, what a resume vs CV is, discipline conventions) rather than focusing on specific formatting rules, decision logic, or unique instructions. The content would benefit enormously from aggressive trimming and splitting into referenced files.

Suggestions

Reduce content by 60-70%: Remove the resume vs CV comparison table, discipline-specific conventions, CV length guidelines, and basic explanations of what each section contains—Claude already knows these things. Focus only on specific formatting rules and decision logic.

Split detailed section formatting examples into a separate SECTIONS.md reference file, keeping only a brief overview and the output template in SKILL.md.

Add a clear sequential workflow: e.g., 1) Identify position type → 2) Determine section order → 3) Gather information from user → 4) Format sections → 5) Review against checklist, with explicit decision points.

Create a separate CONVENTIONS.md for discipline-specific formatting rules and role-specific emphasis, referenced from the main skill with clear one-level-deep links.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. Explains obvious concepts like the difference between a resume and CV, what each CV section means, and discipline-specific conventions—all knowledge Claude already possesses. The comparison table, length guidelines, and most section descriptions are unnecessary padding.

1 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete formatting examples for each section which are useful templates, but these are static text examples rather than executable code/commands. The guidance is more of a reference document than actionable instructions for generating a specific output. The output format template at the end adds some actionability.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 'When to Use' section and output format provide some workflow structure, and the checklist at the end serves as a validation step. However, there's no clear sequential process for gathering information, making decisions about section ordering, or iterating with the user. The process of actually building the CV is implicit rather than explicit.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content—section guides, discipline conventions, role-specific emphasis, formatting examples—is inlined into a single massive document. Much of this content (e.g., discipline-specific conventions, role-specific emphasis) could be split into referenced files.

1 / 3

Total

6

/

12

Passed

Description

32%

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 identifies a clear niche (academic CV formatting) and mentions relevant content areas, but it lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and could be more specific about the concrete actions performed. Adding trigger terms and common synonyms would significantly improve skill selection accuracy.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'curriculum vitae', 'academic resume', 'faculty CV', 'tenure application', or 'academic job application'.

List more specific actions such as 'organize publication lists, format grant histories, structure teaching portfolios, and arrange academic service sections'.

Include common file or context variations like 'LaTeX CV', '.tex', or 'academic job market' to improve trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (academic CVs) and lists some specific elements (publications, grants, teaching), but doesn't describe concrete actions beyond 'format' — e.g., it doesn't mention organizing sections, generating citation lists, or converting between formats.

2 / 3

Completeness

Describes what the skill does (formats academic CVs) but has no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the rubric should cap completeness at 2, and the 'what' itself is also fairly thin, bringing it to 1.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords like 'CVs', 'academic', 'publications', 'grants', and 'teaching' which users might naturally say, but misses common variations like 'curriculum vitae', 'academic resume', 'research experience', 'tenure', or 'faculty CV'.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'academic positions' qualifier and specific elements like publications and grants help distinguish it from general resume/CV skills, but it could still overlap with general CV formatting or resume-building skills without clearer boundaries.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
paramchoudhary/resumeskills
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.