hypothesis-generation

I took a look at your hypothesis-generation skill and wanted to share some thoughts.

Links:

• GitHub
• Your agentic skill in the SkillzWave marketplace

The TL;DR

You're at 85/100, solid B territory. This is graded against Anthropic's skill best practices. Your strongest area is Progressive Disclosure Architecture (27/30) — the way you layered everything across SKILL.md plus three reference files is textbook stuff. The weakest spot is Spec Compliance (11/15), mainly because you're missing trigger phrases in the description.

What's Working Well

• Solid file architecture — Main SKILL.md at 156 lines, with ~1300 lines of detail tucked into references. That's the right balance. The 4-file structure keeps the main entry point clean without hiding depth.
• Comprehensive workflow — Your 8-step numbered process with sub-bullets and quality evaluation checklists is genuinely useful. Step 5 (quality assessment) does real validation work.
• Strong template game — That 303-line output template for hypothesis statements is practical and gives users a clear target. Reference files include worked examples for experimental designs.
• Consistent vocabulary — Terms like "testable", "falsifiable", and "mechanism" are used throughout, which makes this feel coherent.

The Big One: Add Trigger Phrases to Your Description

Right now your description is:

"Generate testable hypotheses. Formulate from observations, design experiments, explore competing exp..."

It reads like an abstract rather than actionable metadata. Trigger phrases are how Claude finds skills — they're the keywords someone searches for. You need explicit triggers like:

descri...