CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

product-manager-toolkit

产品经理必备利器!当面临海量需求排期、用户调研分析和PRD撰写等场景时,使用此工具可一键计算RICE得分、自动提炼访谈洞察并快速生成标准PRD文档,大幅提升需求决策与产品交付效率,让规划更科学。

54

Quality

61%

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/product-manager-toolkit/product-manager-toolkit/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

48%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.

The core script-usage content is accurate, executable, and well-organized, with clean workflows and a properly structured bundle. However, the body is heavily padded with generic PM textbook knowledge and a long cross-skill integration section, roughly doubling its token footprint without adding skill-specific value.

Suggestions

Move the generic knowledge sections (Prioritization Frameworks, Discovery Frameworks, Metrics & Analytics, Best Practices, Common Pitfalls, Integration Points) into a references/ file, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview of the three workflows and script commands.

Remove or drastically compress the ~250-line '与智能体协作框架集成' section — it duplicates content, references paths in other skills' bundles (agent-team/references/agent-registry.md, multi-agent-meeting/assets/...) that are not part of this skill, and contains fictional self.call_tool() snippets.

Turn soft checkpoints into explicit validation steps in the workflows (e.g., after running the RICE script, verify the CSV columns match name,reach,impact,confidence,effort before trusting the scores).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~600-line body contains several padded sections explaining PM concepts Claude already knows: full derivations of the RICE formula, Value vs Effort matrix, MoSCoW, North Star Metric framework, AARRR funnel analysis, stakeholder management tips, common pitfalls, and tool name lists (Amplitude, Jira, Figma, etc.), plus a ~250-line Chinese section on integrating with an 'agent-team' skill. This matches 'noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections'. It is not a 1 because the Quick Start and Key Scripts sections do add genuinely useful, non-obvious content.

2 / 5

Actionability

Quick Start and Key Scripts provide concrete, verified commands (e.g., 'python scripts/rice_prioritizer.py features.csv --capacity 15 --output json') whose flags match the actual argparse interfaces, and the PRD workflow points to a real templates file. However, the majority of the document by volume — frameworks, best practices, and the agent-integration section — is abstract 'guidance rather than instruction', so it sits between 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' and 'mostly executable guidance'.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The three core workflows (prioritization, customer discovery, PRD development) are clearly sequenced with numbered steps and embedded executable commands, and checkpoints are present ('Review with stakeholders', 'Validate against strategy', 'Measure actual vs expected behavior'). Not a 5 because these checkpoints are soft advice rather than explicit validation steps with feedback loops.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Structure is good: the bundle's real assets — scripts/rice_prioritizer.py, scripts/customer_interview_analyzer.py, and references/prd_templates.md (which does contain the four advertised templates) — are clearly signaled from the body. But large amounts of content that clearly belongs in reference files (framework explanations, metrics frameworks, best practices, and the entire ~250-line agent-integration playbook referencing other skills' paths like 'agent-team/references/agent-registry.md' that are not part of this bundle) are inlined in SKILL.md.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 solid description that concretely states three PM capabilities and an explicit 'when' clause with natural trigger scenarios in Chinese. It is weakened by marketing fluff and over-claims ('必备利器', '一键', '大幅提升效率,让规划更科学') that add tokens without aiding triggering, and by the open-ended '等场景' phrasing of the trigger clause.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names three concrete actions — "一键计算RICE得分" (one-click RICE scoring), "自动提炼访谈洞察" (auto-extract interview insights), "快速生成标准PRD文档" (fast PRD generation) — which matches the anchor 'lists several specific actions; minor gaps in coverage'. It is not a 5 because it pads these with over-claims ('一键', '大幅提升…效率', '让规划更科学') and omits other capabilities like roadmap generation.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what it does ("计算RICE得分、提炼访谈洞察并生成标准PRD文档") and when to use it ("当面临海量需求排期、用户调研分析和PRD撰写等场景时"). Not a 5 because the 'when' clause is scenario-based with an open-ended "等场景" ('etc. scenarios') rather than explicit user-utterance triggers like 'when the user mentions RICE scores or asks for a PRD'.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a PM would actually say are present — "海量需求排期" (feature scheduling), "用户调研分析" (user research analysis), "PRD撰写" (PRD writing), "RICE得分", "访谈洞察" — giving good keyword coverage. Not a 5 because common variations like "优先级排序" (prioritization), "需求文档", or "功能评审" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The combination of RICE scoring, interview insight extraction, and PRD generation carves out a clear product-management niche with minimal conflict risk against non-PM skills. Not a 5 because it could still overlap with other generic product-management or prioritization skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

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

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (604 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
anbeime/skill
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.