CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

contradiction-analysis

矛盾分析法:把复杂问题拆成若干对立面,找出规定其他矛盾的主要矛盾及其主要方面,判定对抗性 / 非对抗性,并据此选择处理方式。当问题头绪多、多个因素互相牵制、优先级不清、根因不明、反复修不好、trade-off 说不清时触发;直接执行类任务或用户已定方案时不触发。 English: Contradiction analysis. Decompose a tangled problem into opposing forces, isolate the principal contradiction and its dominant side, classify it as antagonistic or non-antagonistic, and choose the response accordingly. Trigger on unclear priorities, unknown root causes, recurring failures, or trade-offs that resist explanation; skip for direct execution or when the user has already chosen the solution.

Quality

89%

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

82%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.

A well-structured, lean, actionable analytical skill with a clear sequenced workflow and built-in validation discipline. The main gap is that the two referenced bundle files are cited but do not exist, slightly undermining progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Create the referenced files original-texts.md and contradiction-types-reference.md (or place them under references/) so the bottom-of-body links resolve to real content.

Add an explicit feedback/error-recovery loop in the 操作规程 — e.g., 'if the chosen principal contradiction fails to relieve secondary ones, re-run step 2' — to reach full workflow-clarity maturity.

Clarify one or two concrete edge cases in the actionability steps (e.g., how to proceed when two contradictions appear equally dominant) to close the remaining actionability gap.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and procedural — it assumes Claude's intelligence, never explains what a contradiction is, and every line (用/不用, the six-step 操作规程, output template, 纪律, 交接) earns its place; the single epigraph is minimal orientation rather than padding.

5 / 5

Actionability

It gives concrete, executable guidance: an explicit six-step procedure with defined tests (因果/根源/阶段), antagonistic/non-antagonistic decision rules mapped to concrete responses, and a copy-paste output template — though as an analytical (not code) skill, a few edge cases are left implicit.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced six-step process with embedded validation checks (the three principal-contradiction tests and the 纪律 checklist) and a monitoring step (#6), but it lacks an explicit error-recovery feedback loop, which the anchor-5 example requires.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned (用/不用, 操作规程, 输出模板, 纪律, 交接) and ends with two clearly signaled, one-level-deep references (original-texts.md, contradiction-types-reference.md); however those referenced files are not present in any bundle directory, so navigation to them cannot be confirmed, keeping it below a 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 strong, specific description that clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with concrete trigger phrases and an explicit skip condition. Minor room to broaden trigger-term synonyms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — 'Decompose a tangled problem into opposing forces', 'isolate the principal contradiction and its dominant side', 'classify it as antagonistic or non-antagonistic', 'choose the response accordingly' — giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill does.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both 'what' (decompose, isolate, classify, choose response) and 'when' ('Trigger on unclear priorities, unknown root causes, recurring failures, or trade-offs that resist explanation'), with concrete trigger phrases and an explicit non-trigger condition.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It surfaces natural user phrases ('unclear priorities, unknown root causes, recurring failures, trade-offs that resist explanation') that a user would actually say, plus an explicit skip clause, but coverage of synonyms and variations is good rather than fully comprehensive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche (contradiction/矛盾 analysis) with distinct triggers and an explicit 'skip for direct execution or when the user has already chosen the solution' clause, minimizing conflict with execution-oriented skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 2 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

HughYau/qiushi-skill

Path

skills/contradiction-analysis/SKILL.md

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.