physics-databases

Query physics databases — NIST CODATA constants, NIST Chemistry WebBook, Materials Project, Particle Data Group (PDG), OEIS sequences. Always use these instead of hardcoding physical constants.

Quality

65%

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 ./backend/cli/skills/physics/physics-databases/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%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 content is action-oriented and mostly executable with clear sectioning, but it lacks validation checkpoints in its workflows and performs no progressive disclosure — all reference data is inlined despite the skill's length.

Suggestions

Add validation/verification steps (e.g., confirm a looked-up constant matches expected units, or handle API errors/retries for Materials Project) to raise workflow_clarity.

Move the PDG particle dict and the Quick Reference table into separate reference files (e.g., references/pdg-data.json, references/constants-table.md) and link to them from SKILL.md for genuine progressive disclosure.

Replace hardcoded astronomical print literals with scipy/astropy lookups to stay consistent with the skill's own "never hardcode constants" rule and tighten conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean executable code with minimal pedantic prose, but the Quick Reference table restates values already shown in the code and the astronomical section hardcodes print literals, which is minor redundancy rather than padding.	4 / 5
Actionability	Most sections provide copy-paste-ready executable Python (scipy lookups, unit conversions, Materials Project with graceful ImportError), but the PDG and astronomical sections are data-dump literals rather than runnable queries, leaving minor gaps below fully executable.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The six numbered workflows are clearly sequenced within each section, but there are no validation or verification checkpoints and error/feedback handling is implicit; the sequence is present but checkpoints are missing.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The file is well-organized with clear section headers, but no bundle files exist and everything is inline (the PDG dict and reference table could live in separate files); structure is present but progressive disclosure to one-level-deeper references is absent.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 clearly names its domain and a strong set of authoritative sources with low conflict risk, but it is missing an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and relies on a single broad action verb, which caps completeness and specificity just below the top anchors.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when you need a physical constant, particle property, or material data instead of hardcoding values."

Broaden the action vocabulary beyond "Query" (e.g., look up, convert units, cite sources) to support a specificity score of 5.

Include a few natural synonyms/extensions users might say (e.g., "fundamental constants", "unit conversion", "material properties").

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names a comprehensive set of concrete sources ("NIST CODATA constants, NIST Chemistry WebBook, Materials Project, Particle Data Group (PDG), OEIS sequences") but the action set is essentially one verb ("Query") rather than multiple distinct actions, so it falls just below the level-5 anchor.	4 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear "what" (query the enumerated databases) but lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause; "Always use these instead of hardcoding physical constants" is usage guidance rather than a natural trigger, and the rubric caps completeness at 3 for a missing 'Use when' clause.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms users would say ("physical constants", "NIST", "Materials Project", "PDG") with good coverage, but a few synonyms/extensions a user might voice are absent, keeping it below the comprehensive level-5 anchor.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The named physics sources (NIST/CODATA, Materials Project, PDG, OEIS) carve a clear niche with low overlap risk, though the broad "physics databases" framing leaves minor overlap with general scientific tooling skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 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: synthetic-sciences/openscience
Path: backend/cli/skills/physics/physics-databases/SKILL.md
Commit: 7dabbf0

Reviewed: 3 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.