CC meta-analysis
Systematic review and meta-analysis pipeline for medical research. Covers protocol registration (PROSPERO), search strategy, screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment (QUADAS-2/ROBINS-I), statistical synthesis (bivariate/HSROC for DTA, random-effects for intervention), and PRISMA-compliant reporting. Supports both DTA and intervention meta-analyses.
Systematic review and meta-analysis pipeline for medical research.
As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 44. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 11507 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "triggers" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "tools" - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 57, 324, 451): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 11 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 11507 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 85Steps. 149 steps, 3 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Failures and branches. 3 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- high The skill tells the model to perform an irreversible action with no human approval
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 361: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 27 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 149 items
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (14 of 16)
- +3All 6 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 62.