CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

multi-objective-optimization

Pareto-aware molecular design balancing multiple ADMET properties simultaneously. Based on MultiMol (Yu 2025) and MOLLM (Ran 2025).

49

Quality

62%

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 ./backend/cli/skills/coding/multi-objective-optimization/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

61%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-structured, executable skill body whose CLI examples verifiably match the bundled script, weakened by a missing referenced script (property_radar.py), an unexplained objectives syntax, and the absence of any validation/feedback loop in the batch generate-and-rank workflow. Conceptual overview prose and dated citation figures add tokens without adding action.

Suggestions

Add the scripts/property_radar.py file to the bundle (or remove the "Property Radar Plot" workflow and its Script Reference row) — the body currently documents a script that does not exist.

Document the objectives syntax once near the first example: the available property names, the minimize/maximize/range directions, and what the trailing numbers (targets, thresholds, or bounds) mean.

Add validation steps to the workflows — e.g., what to do on invalid SMILES, empty Pareto fronts, or malformed objectives strings — and trim the Overview's motivation prose and the dated paper-citation list with success-rate figures.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely command-first and lean, but the Overview spends lines justifying why multi-objective design matters ("Real drug design is never single-objective...") and lists three papers with dated success-rate figures ("82.3% multi-objective success rate", "Yu et al., 2025") — context Claude doesn't need to execute, with time-sensitive numbers placed outside any deprecated/old-patterns section. Mostly efficient with some unnecessary explanation fits level 3 better than level 4's 'minor instances'.

3 / 5

Actionability

Three concrete, copy-paste bash commands with exact flags that match the actual argparse interface of scripts/pareto_optimize.py, covering optimize, analyze, and visualization modes. Not level 5 because the objectives mini-language ("LogP:minimize:3.0,QED:maximize:0.5,TPSA:range:20:130") is never explained (what the numbers mean, available properties, available directions), and workflow 3 invokes scripts/property_radar.py which is not present in the bundle.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The three workflows are numbered and each is a single unambiguous command, but a batch generate-and-rank operation has no validation checkpoints — nothing on what to do when the SMILES is invalid, the objectives string is malformed, or the Pareto front comes back empty. Sequence present but checkpoints missing matches level 3; the feedback-loops scoring note for batch operations keeps it from level 4.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Scored against the actual bundle: clear sectioned overview, a Script Reference table mapping purpose and outputs, and one-level-deep pointers into scripts/ with no inline bloat — good structure with minor gaps (level 4). Not level 5 because one of the two referenced scripts, scripts/property_radar.py, does not exist in the bundle, breaking navigation for the radar-plot workflow.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

50%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 states a clear, domain-specific capability in proper third-person voice, but omits any 'use when' trigger clause and any enumeration of concrete actions, relying instead on academic citations. It would benefit most from an explicit trigger sentence and natural user phrasings.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause, e.g., "Use when the user wants to optimize molecules against multiple properties at once (e.g., potency while keeping hERG safe) or asks for Pareto front analysis."

Enumerate 2-3 concrete capabilities in the description itself, e.g., "Generates candidates, ranks them by Pareto dominance, and identifies non-dominated tradeoff fronts."

Include natural synonyms users would actually say — "multi-objective optimization", "balance ADMET tradeoffs", "Pareto front" — rather than the unusual coinage "Pareto-aware" alone.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Pareto-aware molecular design balancing multiple ADMET properties simultaneously" names the domain plus one concrete capability, but the description never enumerates the skill's actions (generate candidates, rank by Pareto dominance, analyze fronts). It matches 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' rather than the level-4 anchor's list of several specific actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (Pareto-aware molecular design balancing ADMET properties), but there is no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger clause anywhere in the description, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. The citation sentence ("Based on MultiMol (Yu 2025) and MOLLM (Ran 2025)") adds provenance, not usage guidance.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords exist ("Pareto", "ADMET", "molecular design") but common natural phrasings users would say are missing — e.g., "multi-objective optimization", "balance potency and solubility", "Pareto front", "drug design". Not level 4 because keyword coverage lacks common variations and synonyms, yet it is well above generic one-or-two-keyword level 2.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Pareto/multi-objective framing carves out a niche, but "molecular design" and "ADMET properties" overlap sibling skills (single-objective molecular optimization, ADMET prediction) and the description offers no distinguishing trigger guidance. Somewhat specific, yet still at risk of overlapping similar skills — the level-3 anchor.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

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 — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository

synthetic-sciences/openscience

Path

backend/cli/skills/coding/multi-objective-optimization/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.