CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

faq-collector

将成功解决的用户问题收录到 FAQ 知识库。问题解决后自动判断是否收录。也可以在用户说"收录到 FAQ"、"记录这个问题"、"add to FAQ"时手动触发。

68

Quality

82%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

An exemplarily lean, single-purpose skill body: exact file location, a runnable creation command, a complete entry template, and a sequenced workflow with a built-in dedup checkpoint. The only meaningful improvement would be one worked example entry and explicit criteria for when an existing entry should be updated.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~20-line body is lean and efficient with zero padding: every section (收录标准, 文件, 条目格式, 流程, 搜索匹配, 协作) delivers operational information Claude does not already know. It explains no general concepts and matches the anchor 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place'.

5 / 5

Actionability

Concrete guidance is strong: an exact file path ('<project_root>/.cherry-assistant/faq.md'), a runnable command ('mkdir -p .cherry-assistant'), and a complete entry template. Minor gaps keep it below 5: the template placeholders (e.g. '[通用化问题表述]') are never instantiated with a worked example, and '相似但更好' (similar but better) update criteria are undefined — mostly executable with minor gaps (anchor 4).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The flow (问题解决→判断收录标准→读FAQ查重→无重复则通用化后追加→有相似但更好则更新) gives a clear sequence with the dedup-read acting as an explicit pre-write checkpoint, and append-only writes are not destructive so the cap-3 rule does not apply. Below anchor 5 because the 'update if better' branch lacks defined criteria and there is no post-write verification step.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple single-task skill under 50 lines with no external references needed, and the body is organized into clearly labeled sections (criteria, file, format, flow, search, collaboration). Per the rubric's simple-skill exception, well-organized sections alone merit a 5; there are no bundle files to misplace.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A concise, third-person description that clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with explicit quoted trigger phrases in two languages. Its main weakness is limited coverage of the skill's concrete capabilities (dedup, entry updating, FAQ search/matching), which are only visible in the body.

Suggestions

Enumerate 1-2 more concrete capabilities in the description, e.g. '去重检查已收录条目,命中关键词直接返回答案' (dedup-check existing entries; match keywords and return answers directly) to raise specificity.

Add a distinct trigger like '查 FAQ' or 'FAQ 里有没有这个问题' to cover the retrieval path and reduce reliance on the generic phrase '记录这个问题', which could conflict with issue-reporter or note-taking skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("收录到 FAQ 知识库") and 1-2 concrete actions (auto-judging inclusion after a solved problem, manual trigger), but does not enumerate the skill's actual behaviors such as dedup-checking, updating similar entries, or keyword-based FAQ retrieval. It matches anchor 3 ('names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive') and falls short of anchor 4, which requires several specific listed actions with only minor coverage gaps.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' ("将成功解决的用户问题收录到 FAQ 知识库") and 'when' with concrete trigger conditions ("问题解决后自动判断" plus explicit manual trigger phrases). This matches the anchor-5 example pattern of explicit what-and-when with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It provides natural trigger phrases users would actually say ("收录到 FAQ", "记录这个问题", "add to FAQ") including an English synonym, giving good keyword coverage. Not a 5 because a few natural variants are missing (e.g., 'FAQ', '保存到知识库', '查 FAQ'); not a 3 because the explicit quoted phrases go well beyond generic keywords.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

FAQ collection is a clear niche with distinct triggers, but the generic phrase "记录这个问题" creates minor overlap risk with note-taking or issue-reporter skills the body references. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk (anchor 4), not anchor 5 since one trigger could plausibly fire a different skill.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
CherryHQ/cherry-studio
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.