SKILLEMALL.ai

AB dental-insurance-preauth

Write a dental pre-authorisation request or claim narrative that gets approved the first time — the diagnosis, the documented failure of lesser treatment, and the attachments a reviewer needs, assembled in the order they assess them. Use when asked to write a pre-auth, submit a predetermination, appeal a denied dental claim, or write a narrative for a crown, implant, or perio case. Produces the narrative, the supporting-evidence checklist, the attachment list, and an appeal letter if the claim was already denied. Administrative support only; clinical justification must come from the treating clinician's own findings.

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills Agent Skills author: mohitagw15856 MIT 1 file body ≈ 1 326 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com analyzed 2 d ago

Write a dental pre-authorisation request or claim narrative that gets approved the first time — the diagnosis, the documented failure of lesser treatment, and…

As a process B 67/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers, failures and branches, running it twice

GeneratorSoftware developmentWriting and documentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
87
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
67/100
Nearly there
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: dental-insurance-preauth (mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills)

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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: 1. 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 67/100

    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 34 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1326 tokens

    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)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 624: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 9 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 34 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (0 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.