CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ablation-planner

Use when main results pass result-to-claim (`claim_supported = yes` or `partial`) and ablation studies are needed for paper submission. A secondary Codex agent designs ablations from a reviewer's perspective; the local executor reviews feasibility and implements.

67

Quality

81%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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, actionable workflow with clear sequencing and validation checkpoints for a batch experimental process. The main improvement area is adding an explicit feedback loop for smoke-test failures and tightening minor redundancy between the Rules and Workflow sections.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'if a smoke test fails, debug the config/code and re-run the smoke test before the full run' feedback loop in Step 5 to push workflow_clarity toward 5.

De-duplicate priority guidance between Step 4/Step 5 and the Rules section (e.g., config-only-first and component-over-hyperparameter priority) to improve conciseness.

Consider extracting the full Codex spawn_agent prompt template into a references file with a one-line pointer, reducing the inline body length and improving progressive_disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; minor redundancy where the Rules section reiterates priorities already implied by the workflow steps.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides a concrete copy-paste spawn_agent block (model, reasoning_effort, fillable message) and a structured table template plus specific run steps; placeholders like "[description from project files]" are expected for a parameterized skill rather than a gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five steps are clearly sequenced with real checkpoints — Step 4 feasibility review and Step 5 smoke-test-before-full-run — and batch-operation validation is present, so the batch-without-validation cap does not apply; lacks an explicit smoke-test-failure fix-and-retry loop for a 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Self-contained, well-organized into When-to-Use / Workflow / Rules sections with no nested references; no bundle files exist to verify, and the longer body could potentially split out the agent prompt template, keeping it just below a 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

87%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, well-targeted description that answers what and when with concrete, third-person phrasing and a distinct research niche. Minor room to expand the concrete action list for full comprehensiveness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (ablation studies) and several concrete actions — "designs ablations from a reviewer's perspective", "reviews feasibility and implements" — with minor coverage gaps; not yet a comprehensive 5-style action list.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: "Use when main results pass result-to-claim ... and ablation studies are needed for paper submission" (when) and "A secondary Codex agent designs ablations ... the local executor reviews feasibility and implements" (what), with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural research-domain terms like "ablation studies", "paper submission", and "reviewer" are present, though it leans on toolchain jargon ("result-to-claim", "claim_supported") that a few users may not phrase exactly this way.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (reviewer-led ablation design for paper submission) tied to a specific workflow, with triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills; minimal conflict risk.

5 / 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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep
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.