effective-governance-method

Use when implementing classical Chinese governance (循吏之道). Emphasizes minimal intervention, leading by example, indirect influence (raise gate barriers to raise cart heights), and conflict-of-interest rules prohibiting officials from competing with commoners.

Quality

78%

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_238/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%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 content is a well-structured, quote-centered treatment of 循吏之道 with explicit verification checkpoints. It is held back from higher scores by principle-heavy (rather than procedure-heavy) actionability and a few redundant restatements of the classical quotes.

Suggestions

Convert the governance principles into more actionable procedures—e.g., explicit decision steps for when to choose indirect influence vs. direct orders, and a concrete checklist for applying the conflict-of-interest rules.

Trim bullets that merely restate the preceding quotation (e.g. "Personal conduct influences public behavior") to tighten conciseness toward level 5.

Add a short 'When to apply this skill' trigger summary at the top so the body's structure mirrors the description's trigger guidance.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and quote-driven with short sections; each classical quotation is the substance rather than padding, though a few bullets restate the preceding quote (e.g. "Personal conduct influences public behavior" after the 不教而民从其化 line), so it is efficient with minor trimmable instances.	4 / 5
Actionability	As an instruction-only skill it provides some concrete guidance—numbered conflict-resolution steps, the gate-barrier technique, and the gift-refusal reasoning process—but the bulk is principle statements and quotations rather than fully specified actionable procedures, leaving key execution detail incomplete.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The numbered conflict-resolution and gift-refusal sequences plus a dedicated Verification section with explicit checkpoints (confirm leading-by-example, validate infrequent law changes, check outcomes against benchmarks) give a clear sequence with most checkpoints present, with only minor gaps.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-organized with clear section headers and is self-contained with no external references needed; because it runs ~70 lines (above the under-50 simple-skill threshold) it is good structure rather than the ideal level-5 lean overview.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

78%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.

The description is well-constructed: it pairs an explicit 'Use when' trigger with a concrete list of governance principles and a distinctive niche. Its main limitation is the somewhat narrow singular trigger phrase and a few missing synonymous keywords.

Suggestions

Broaden the trigger with more natural phrasings users might say, e.g. 'Use when designing or applying 循吏之道 governance, minimal-intervention administration, or conflict-of-interest rules for officials'.

Add one or two synonyms/file-style cues (e.g. 'indirect governance', 'rule-by-example') to strengthen trigger term coverage toward level 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and lists several concrete governance actions—"minimal intervention, leading by example, indirect influence (raise gate barriers to raise cart heights), and conflict-of-interest rules prohibiting officials from competing with commoners"—with only minor coverage gaps, fitting the 'several specific actions' anchor rather than the fully comprehensive level 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly states both what (the emphasized principles) and when ("Use when implementing classical Chinese governance"), but the single trigger phrase could be more specific with additional variations, so it sits at level 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural phrases a user might say ("classical Chinese governance", "minimal intervention", "leading by example", "conflict-of-interest") plus the native term 循吏之道, giving good keyword coverage though a few synonymous phrasings are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche "classical Chinese governance (循吏之道)" with its specific principle triggers is highly distinct and unlikely to collide with other skills, matching the clear-niche anchor.	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_238/SKILL.md
Commit: 6b836e3

Reviewed: 13 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.