CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

wiki-research-loop

Auto-grow a pro-workflow wiki by running a budget-capped BFS research loop over pluggable source fetchers (web, arXiv, GitHub). Each iteration pops a seed from the queue, fetches sources, drafts a wiki page, dedupes claims against existing pages, enqueues follow-up seeds. Halts on budget cap, depth cap, or convergence. Use when the user says "research <topic>", "grow the <slug> wiki", "auto-research", or wants a knowledge base that builds itself overnight.

Quality

87%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

82%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-built operational skill document: executable commands, a complete plugin interface, explicit budget/convergence/kill-switch safeguards, and good file organization. The main gaps are two references to scripts that are not actually shipped (clarified only in the Status section) and an implicit rather than explicit failure-handling path.

Suggestions

Mark the 'Reactive trigger' and 'Cron tick' sections as not-yet-shipped (or remove them) so the body doesn't reference scripts/file-watcher.js and scripts/research-tick.js that aren't in the bundle.

Add one line on fetch-failure handling in the loop semantics (e.g., 'fetch error → mark seed failed, continue to next seed') to make the error-recovery feedback loop explicit.

Move the internal phase numbers ('Phase 3.3.2', 'Phase 3.3.4') out of section headers, or fold them into the Status section, so headers describe functionality rather than project plan milestones.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence — terse tables, a compact flow sketch, and no padding explaining known concepts — but internal project phase numbers ('Phase 3.3.2', 'Phase 3.3.4') and cross-skill planning detail earn few operational tokens. It is above 3 (only minor trimmable content) but not 5 since the phase-tracking references are not content Claude needs to execute the skill.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable: copy-paste CLI invocations with flags ('node $SKILL_ROOT/scripts/research-loop.js run <slug> [--max-pages N]...'), a complete fetcher interface code block, env-var overrides, and a one-line kill-switch command ('touch ~/.pro-workflow/STOP'). This matches the copy-paste-ready anchor covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The loop semantics diagram gives a clear sequence, and checkpoints are explicit (pre-iteration cost projection, post-iteration token tracking, per-iteration kill-switch and convergence checks) — appropriate validation for a batch/spending operation. It falls short of 5 because error recovery for failed fetches is only implied by the seed 'failed' status, never spelled out.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and script references are one level deep and mostly real (research-loop.js and the three bundled source-fetchers exist). It is not 5 because 'scripts/file-watcher.js' and 'scripts/research-tick.js' are referenced in present tense but absent from the bundle — only the trailing Status section reveals they are deferred — and the fetcher documentation could live in a separate reference file.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

88%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 description: third-person, concrete, and comprehensive about the loop mechanics, with an explicit multi-phrase 'Use when' trigger clause. The only weaknesses are a slightly overlapping generic 'research' trigger and a few missing natural synonyms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists a full chain of concrete actions — 'pops a seed from the queue, fetches sources, drafts a wiki page, dedupes claims against existing pages, enqueues follow-up seeds' — plus halt conditions, matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor. It is not 4 because coverage is broad and specific rather than having minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both 'what' (the full iteration loop with halt conditions) and 'when' ('Use when the user says "research <topic>"...') are answered explicitly with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor. The 'when' clause is explicit and multi-trigger, so it is not 4.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases are present ('research <topic>', 'grow the <slug> wiki', 'auto-research', 'knowledge base that builds itself overnight'), giving good keyword coverage. It falls short of 5 because common synonyms like 'literature review', 'find papers on', or 'build a knowledge base' are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The wiki/BFS/fetcher niche is clearly distinct from most skills, but the bare trigger 'research <topic>' invites overlap with generic research or web-search skills, so minor overlap risk remains. It is not 5 because of that trigger breadth; it is well above 3 since the core capability is unmistakable.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 2 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

rohitg00/pro-workflow

Path

skills/wiki-research-loop/SKILL.md

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.