AC scholar-sidekick-mcp
Use the connected scholar-sidekick-mcp MCP server when the user mentions a scholarly identifier (DOI, PMID, PMCID, ISBN, arXiv, ISSN, NASA ADS bibcode, WHO IRIS URL) and wants structured metadata, a formatted citation, a bibliography export file, a retraction check, an open-access check, or verification that a claimed citation is real (not fabricated). Requires the MCP server connected with a RAPIDAPI_KEY; for a zero-install path use the scholar-sidekick-api skill instead.
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
How to improve
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Concealment
en-hide-from-userSKILL.md:43Instruction to hide actions from the user (negated — the text forbids it)**If these tools are not in your available toolset, the server is not connected — say so plainly and stop.** Do not try to invoke the tool names as shell commands, and do not silently install or launc
negated
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 29 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 5 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2433 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
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
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 477: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 items
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.