CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

wechat-hotspot-publisher

自媒体创作者和运营专员在需要全网追热点分发时,使用此技能可自动采集热点并10分制筛选优质选题,AI一键生成适配公众号、小红书、B站的爆款图文与HTML排版,直接发布至各平台草稿箱,轻松完成多平台高质量内容分发。

59

Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/wechat-hotspot-publisher/wechat-hotspot-publisher/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

60%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 body delivers a well-sequenced, actionable workflow with real safety gates (preview loop, user confirmation, draft-box-only publishing) and a properly organized resource index pointing to genuine bundle files. Its main weakness is heavy redundancy — layout rules, defaults, and post-publish steps are each repeated two to three times, inflating token cost without adding guidance.

Suggestions

Deduplicate the repeated material: state the HTML layout rules (colors, 20% density, 2.35:1 cover, heading levels) once and point to references/html-layout-guide.md everywhere else; the same applies to the default-platform rules and the post-publish draft-box steps.

Cut the 常见问题 section or trim it to items not already answered inline (Q2, Q3, Q4, Q6 all restate earlier content), which alone would remove ~30 lines of padding.

Add brief failure-path guidance for publishing (what a failed custom_api push looks like and what to retry) and note the credentials each of publish_xiaohongshu.py / publish_bilibili.py needs.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is noticeably padded with repeated material: the HTML layout rules (colors, 2.35:1 cover, ≤20% highlight density, heading structure) appear three times (sections 3.5/3.7, 注意事项/排版规范, and 默认模式), the post-publish draft-box instructions appear twice verbatim, the default-platform choice is restated in three places, and the 常见问题 Q&A largely restates earlier sections. This matches 'noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections' rather than the 'mostly efficient with some trimming possible' anchor.

2 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is mostly executable: full CLI invocations with per-flag explanations for all three publish scripts ('python scripts/publish_wechat.py --mode custom_api --title ... --content ... --cover ... --tags ...'), a concrete JSON payload format, and a 使用示例 section with copy-paste-ready commands. Minor gaps keep it below 5: placeholder content like '--content "<html>...</html>"', no example of the expected output/response for most commands, and no mention of required credentials/env vars for the xiaohongshu and bilibili scripts.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The process is clearly sequenced (阶段一 generation → preview/adjust loop → 阶段二 publish, plus explicit branches A/B for manual and 秀米 modes), and risky publishing is gated by real checkpoints: user confirmation before push, '安全模式:不会直接发布到线上,需要人工确认', draft-box verification after push, and the preview-until-satisfied feedback loop. Not a 5 because there is no error-recovery guidance (what to do when the custom API returns failure, token expiry, image search returns nothing beyond a one-line Q&A hint).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Structure is good: a 资源索引 lists each script with purpose/modes and each reference with an explicit '何时读取' (when to read) signal, and all referenced paths (references/viral-content-templates.md, references/html-layout-guide.md, references/sources-config.md, scripts/*.py) exist as real one-level-deep bundle files. Below 5 because content that belongs in those reference files is inlined in SKILL.md — e.g., the color palette, highlight-density rules, and platform word counts duplicate references/html-layout-guide.md and viral-content-templates.md, and the layout spec is repeated rather than pointed to.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

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 well-constructed description in third person that covers the whole workflow with concrete actions, named platforms, and an explicit use-when clause. Its main weaknesses are promotional filler words and a trigger clause framed around the user persona rather than concrete request phrasing.

Suggestions

Trim promotional filler ('爆款', '轻松', '高质量') and spend the saved tokens on concrete request-style triggers, e.g. '当用户提到公众号/小红书/B站发布、追热点、多平台分发时使用'.

Name the collection sources (e.g., which hot-topic lists/APIs) to make '自动采集热点' concrete and further distinguish the skill from generic content-generation skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists several concrete actions covering the full pipeline — '自动采集热点' (auto-collect trending topics), '10分制筛选优质选题' (10-point topic filtering), 'AI一键生成适配公众号、小红书、B站的爆款图文与HTML排版' (generate platform-adapted articles and HTML layout), '直接发布至各平台草稿箱' (publish to each platform's draft box). It falls just short of a 5 because of buzzword padding ('爆款', '轻松完成', '高质量') that adds no concrete capability and leaves the collection source unspecified.

4 / 5

Completeness

Both questions are answered: 'what' via the explicit capability list (collect → filter → generate → layout → publish to draft boxes) and 'when' via the explicit clause '在需要全网追热点分发时' (when needing to chase and distribute trending topics across platforms). Not a 5 because the trigger guidance names the audience scenario rather than concrete user requests (e.g., '帮我发布到公众号' style trigger phrases), and not a 3 because the 'when' is explicit, not merely implied.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage: '追热点', '公众号', '小红书', 'B站', '图文', '草稿箱', '分发', '自媒体创作者和运营专员' are phrases a Chinese self-media user would naturally say. A few natural variants are missing (e.g., '微信公众号' full form, '哔哩哔哩' full name, '选题' alone), so it sits between the 'good coverage' (4) and 'comprehensive' (5) anchors, closer to 4.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The multi-platform combination (WeChat Official Account draft box + Xiaohongshu + Bilibili) with hotspot collection and 10-point scoring carves a clear niche that would rarely fire for the wrong skill. Minor overlap risk remains with generic content-writing or single-platform publishing skills, which keeps it below the 'minimal conflict' anchor.

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
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.