Feedback on your quality-manager-qmr skill #82
Description
I found your quality manager skill while evaluating the latest batch—it's got solid bones with real domain expertise, but it's playing a bit too safe as a reference document rather than a working tool for Claude to actually do things.
Links:
The TL;DR
You're at 58/100, which lands you in F territory. Based on Anthropic's skill evaluation framework, you're strongest on Spec Compliance (12/15)—the structure is technically sound—but Progressive Disclosure Architecture is dragging you down hard at 13/30. The skill reads like a governance manual when it should read like a Claude instruction set.
What's Working Well
- Valid structure: Your frontmatter is clean YAML, name follows conventions perfectly, and it's grep-friendly (+1 bonus for that)
- Real domain knowledge: You clearly understand the QMR role in regulated industries—the responsibilities breakdown is accurate and comprehensive
- Spec compliance: Basic requirements are met; no format violations or missing mandatory fields
The Big One: Progressive Disclosure Violation
Here's the thing—you've got a 210-line monolith with placeholder references. That's the opposite of progressive disclosure. The references directory contains dummy text instead of actual content, which tells Claude there's nowhere to go for detail.
The fix: Extract your longer sections (Quality Performance Monitoring, Regulatory Interface Management) into separate reference files. Keep SKILL.md to ~80 lines with just the core, then link out. Specifically:
- Move the 19-line "Quality Performance Monitoring" section (lines 169–188) to
references/monitoring-kpis.md - Move "Regulatory Interface Management" to
references/regulatory-requirements.md - Add a Table of Contents right after the description—you need navigation at 210 lines
- Replace those sections with 1-2 line summaries + "See references/X.md for details"
Impact: +7 points immediately.
Other Things Worth Fixing
-
Weak trigger terms - "quality system governance" is too generic. Specifics win: "prepare management review", "FDA inspection readiness", "ISO 13485 audit", "quality KPI dashboard". Users search for concrete problems, not abstractions.
-
No actionable workflows - You describe what a QMR is, not what Claude should do. Add a "Workflows" section with numbered steps: "When preparing a management review: 1) Query metrics, 2) Analyze compliance, 3) Draft summary, 4) Verify completeness." This is the difference between a manual and a skill.
-
Repetition and marketing speak - "ensuring quality excellence" appears 8 times, "comprehensive" 11 times, and "Ultimate quality system accountability" is pure marketing copy. Tighten by 30% and drop the flowery language—be neutral and direct.
-
Missing examples - You mention templates and scripts but don't show them. Even placeholder examples ("Sample: A management review dashboard includes...") would help users understand what to expect.
Quick Wins
- Add TOC (+2 pts) - Takes 2 minutes, huge UX improvement
- Move content to references (+7 pts) - Most impactful single change
- Strengthen triggers (+3 pts) - Be specific about real use cases
- Cut the marketing language (+2 pts) - "Ensure" beats "Ensuring excellence"
Checkout your skill here: [SkillzWave.ai] | [SpillWave] We have an agentic skill installer that install skills in 14+ coding agent platforms. Check out this guide on how to improve your agentic skills.