comparative-state-analysis

Use when comparing competing states or explaining why weaker parties prevail. Analyzes material resources, leadership quality, and intangible factors like popular support, governance quality, moral legitimacy, and application of benevolence (仁义).

Quality

76%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./kg/ontology/ontology-v1/skus/procedural/skill_039/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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-organized, concise analytical framework with a clear sequenced workflow and validation checkpoints. Its main weakness is actionability: it tells Claude what factors to examine but not how to assess or weigh the more subjective intangible factors.

Suggestions

Add brief, concrete guidance on how to assess the subjective intangible factors (e.g., what 'governance phases' are and how to judge whether governance style matches the current phase, or signals that indicate benevolence (仁义) was applied).

Tighten or remove the 'Expected Outcomes' section, which restates points already covered in Steps 3-4 without adding actionable value.

Convert the final Validation section into a feedback loop that directs Claude back to the relevant step when a check fails (e.g., 'If material and intangible factors were not both assessed, return to Steps 1-3').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with bullet structure and no concept over-explanation, but the 'Expected Outcomes' section restates the obvious and overlaps Steps 3-4, a minor redundancy that keeps it at anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete factor checklists are provided per category, but directives like 'Assess whether governance style matches current phase' and 'Check for application of benevolence (仁义)' lack methodology on how to assess them, fitting anchor 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1-4 are clearly sequenced with an explicit Validation section providing verification checkpoints, but it is a final QA checklist rather than a fix-and-retry feedback loop, so it fits anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no bundle files and no need for external references, organized into clear sections (Overview, Steps, Expected Outcomes, Validation), matching the under-50-line exception for a score of 5.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

82%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, well-structured description that clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it, with distinct natural triggers. The only minor weakness is reliance on a single action verb rather than enumerating several distinct capabilities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description uses a single action verb ('Analyzes') over a comprehensive list of factors, naming the domain and concrete items but not multiple distinct actions, matching anchor 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly states both what it does ('Analyzes material resources, leadership quality, and intangible factors...') and when to use it ('Use when comparing competing states or explaining why weaker parties prevail'), with concrete trigger phrases matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'comparing competing states or explaining why weaker parties prevail' are natural trigger phrases with good coverage for the niche, though a few synonyms/variations are missing, fitting anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche of comparative state analysis with the 仁义/benevolence framing and 'weaker parties prevail' trigger is distinct with minimal conflict risk against other skills, matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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: baojie/shiji-kb
Path: kg/ontology/ontology-v1/skus/procedural/skill_039/SKILL.md
Commit: 6b836e3

Reviewed: 15 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.