CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

research-wiki

Persistent research knowledge base that accumulates papers, ideas, experiments, claims, and their relationships across the entire research lifecycle. Inspired by Karpathy's LLM Wiki pattern. Use when user says "知识库", "research wiki", "add paper", "wiki query", "查知识库", or wants to build/query a persistent field map.

64

Quality

78%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/research-wiki/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%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 high-quality, highly operational body: executable commands dominate, ownership rules are explicit, and risky batch/destructive paths all carry validation or gating. The weaknesses are structural and editorial — heavy inlined reference material with no bundle split, and war-story meta-commentary about past skill versions that costs tokens without guiding execution.

Suggestions

Move the paper-page schema, the query-pack budget table, and the per-skill hook contracts (Hooks 1-4) into one-level-deep reference files (e.g. references/paper-schema.md, references/query-pack.md, references/integration-hooks.md) and link them from the body, keeping SKILL.md as an overview.

Cut the past-version drift anecdotes (the 'earlier versions of this skill described a prose-only init' paragraph and the 'left a real user's research-wiki/ empty for a week' aside) — they narrate skill history rather than instruct, and the recovery path in the resolution block already conveys the fix.

Close the actionability gaps by showing the helper command forms for `update` and `stats` (as is done for ingest/sync/add_edge), and drop the duplicated Karpathy acknowledgement in favor of the single Overview mention.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense, non-obvious operational detail (resolution chain, exact schemas, budgets, ownership rules) with no padding explaining things Claude already knows. But several passages could be trimmed: two past-version drift anecdotes ("Earlier versions of this skill described a prose-only init that omitted query_pack.md — that drifted...", "the failure mode that left a real user's research-wiki/ empty for a week") and a duplicated Karpathy attribution (Overview plus Acknowledgements).

4 / 5

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready bash for the helper-resolution chain, init, ingest (arXiv and venue variants), sync, add_edge, upsert_idea, add_experiment, and add_claim, plus the exact emitted page schema and budget table. Minor gaps keep it off the top anchor: the `update` subcommand shows slash-command examples without the underlying helper invocation, and `stats` shows only an output sample with no command.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Explicit validation and feedback loops throughout: the helper-resolution block hard-fails with a numbered 4-option recovery path; Hook 3 gates supports/invalidates edges on EXP_NODE_OK (node born before edges); batch `sync` validates per-id with silent dedup; UTF-8 conversion mandates a backup first; and `lint` provides a 6-point failure-mode checklist. Sequencing is unambiguous with a mandatory pre-step (helper resolution) before every subcommand.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single SKILL.md is well-sectioned with clear headers, but there is no bundle at all (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), and substantial content that belongs in one-level-deep reference files is inlined: the full paper-page schema, the query-pack budget table, and three per-skill hook contracts. The only file references (../shared-references/capture-antipatterns.md, ../shared-references/integration-contract.md) point outside this skill's bundle, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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.

Strong description: clear what-and-when with concrete, natural (and bilingual) trigger phrases in third person. The main gap is that the actual operations the skill performs (init, ingest, sync, query, update, lint, stats) are only hinted at via the argument-hint rather than stated as capabilities in the description itself.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("Persistent research knowledge base") and its entities ("papers, ideas, experiments, claims, and their relationships") but states only 1-2 actions ("accumulates", "build/query"); the concrete operations (init/ingest/sync/query/lint/stats) never appear, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor rather than the several-actions level above.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: what ("Persistent research knowledge base that accumulates papers, ideas, experiments, claims, and their relationships") and when ("Use when user says \"知识库\", \"research wiki\", \"add paper\", \"wiki query\", \"查知识库\", or wants to build/query a persistent field map") with concrete trigger phrases — the top anchor verbatim.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage including bilingual synonyms ("research wiki", "add paper", "wiki query", "知识库", "查知识库") plus "build/query a persistent field map". Not 5: common variations a user might say (e.g. "ingest paper", "literature notes", "knowledge graph") are missing; well above the 3 anchor's 'missing common variations'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (persistent per-project research wiki) with distinctive triggers; minor overlap risk remains because "add paper" could also fire when a user asks a paper-reading skill to record a paper, i.e. it brushes the closely-related literature skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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

allowed_tools_field

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

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 3 suspicious

Warning

Total

13

/

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.