CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

excel-conditional-comparison-and-large-file-processing

对比Excel多表中的特定系数并对异常值进行颜色标记。

45

Quality

46%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/sn-da-excel-workflow/capability/excel-cell-coloring/duplicate-value-coloring/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%

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

The content delivers concrete, code-driven guidance for a two-step cross-sheet comparison and color-highlighting workflow, but it lacks validation checkpoints and relies on fragile positional extraction logic that is not fully robust. It is organized but monolithic, with the title's 'large file processing' capability never addressed. Adding verification steps and splitting detail into references would lift the score.

Suggestions

Add a validation/verification checkpoint after writing the report (e.g. confirm rows written, verify saved file opens) to support the batch write/highlight operation.

Make the extraction logic more robust or explicitly justify the positional assumptions (label_col_idx/offset_row/value_col_idx) rather than relying on hardcoded offsets and a fixed 0.6 threshold.

Either deliver or remove the 'large file processing' capability promised by the skill name, and consider splitting detailed extraction/report logic into a reference file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with code-forward content, but the example is padded with placeholder comments and a hardcoded threshold (target_standard = 0.6) that could be tightened; it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows but is not fully lean.

2 / 3

Actionability

It provides concrete, runnable openpyxl/pandas code, but the extraction function relies on fragile positional assumptions (label_col_idx, offset_row, value_col_idx) and an incomplete iteration that may miss values, so it is not fully copy-paste ready for real sheets.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Steps are sequenced (extract -> compare -> report/highlight), but there are no validation checkpoints for the batch write/highlight operation and no error recovery loop, and the destructive batch output lacks verification that the saved report was written correctly.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Content is organized into two labeled steps with code blocks, but the body is a single monolithic inline tutorial with no external reference files or navigation; the skill name promises 'large file processing' which is absent, leaving structure present but unsplit.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Description

42%

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

The description states concrete actions but omits any 'when to use' trigger clause, which caps completeness and leaves it without explicit user-facing triggers. It is reasonably specific but not clearly distinguishable from sibling Excel skills. Adding a 'Use when...' sentence with natural trigger terms would substantially raise the score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user needs to compare specific coefficients across multiple Excel sheets and flag anomalies with color highlighting.'

Include natural user-facing terms such as '异常值', '颜色标记', '跨表对比', and '.xlsx' to improve trigger-term coverage.

Clarify the distinct niche (cross-sheet coefficient comparison) to reduce overlap with the broader parent Excel workflow skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete actions ('对比Excel多表中的特定系数', '对异常值进行颜色标记') covering both cross-sheet coefficient comparison and anomaly color-highlighting, matching the rubric's 'Lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

It states only what the skill does; there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the judging guidelines completeness is capped at 2 and the absence of any when-trigger lands it at 1.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes the natural keyword 'Excel', but lacks common user-facing variations like '异常值', '颜色标记', '跨表对比', or '.xlsx', so it misses some terms a user would naturally say.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The cross-sheet coefficient comparison + anomaly color-marking niche is somewhat specific, but the generic term 'Excel' could overlap with the broader parent Excel workflow skill, so it is not fully distinct.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
OpenSenseNova/SenseNova-Skills
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.