CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

persuasion-through-fictional-dialogue

Use when presenting criticism indirectly to powerful audiences. Creates fictional characters (like Zixu 子虚, Wuyou 乌有先生) representing competing viewpoints, then resolves through an authoritative voice delivering moral instruction.

65

Quality

77%

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 ./kg/ontology/ontology-v1/skus/procedural/skill_232/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%

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

The body is a well-organized, single-purpose instructional skill with a clear sequenced workflow and an explicit verification checklist, and it appropriately avoids unnecessary external references. Its main weaknesses are mild redundancy across the Overview/Advantages/Expected Outcomes sections and a lack of a concrete worked example or template to make the guidance copy-ready.

Suggestions

Collapse the Advantages and Expected Outcomes sections (which restate the Overview) into a single concise list to improve token efficiency.

Add a short worked example — a brief sample fictional dialogue showing setup, competing views, and the resolving voice — so the guidance is concrete and imitable rather than purely structural.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient, but the Overview, Advantages, and Expected Outcomes sections restate the same core idea ('lead readers to a desired conclusion', 'readers feel they reached conclusions themselves', 'audience receives criticism without feeling attacked'), so it could be tightened and does not fully meet the 'every token earns its place' anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and grounded in a real example ('Zixu Fu', named characters), but it describes the technique structurally rather than providing a worked, copy-ready sample dialogue or template, fitting 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' rather than fully executable guidance.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear sequenced workflow (Structure steps 1–5 and Application Steps 1–5) is paired with an explicit '## Verification' checklist acting as validation checkpoints, meeting the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps' anchor for this non-destructive writing skill.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the body references no external files; the single-purpose skill is well-organized into clear sections (Overview, Structure, Advantages, Application Steps, Expected Outcomes, Verification), which per the simple-skills guideline qualifies for the top anchor.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

85%

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 strong: it uses third person, states concrete actions, gives an explicit 'Use when...' trigger, and occupies a distinctive niche. Its weakest point is trigger-term breadth, which leans on a single niche phrasing rather than a spread of natural variations.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger terms to natural variations a user might say, e.g. 'criticism, indirect feedback, persuasion, allegory, framing advice as a story'.

Consider adding a concise mention of the technique name (e.g. 'fictional dialogue / fu-style persuasion') so users searching by literary term can find it.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — 'Creates fictional characters ... representing competing viewpoints, then resolves through an authoritative voice delivering moral instruction' — matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than the partial-coverage anchor below.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'when' ('Use when presenting criticism indirectly to powerful audiences') and 'what' (creates characters, resolves through authoritative voice), satisfying the 'clearly answers both what AND when with explicit triggers' anchor.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

The single 'Use when presenting criticism indirectly to powerful audiences' phrase is a natural trigger, but coverage of variations a user would actually say is thin and niche, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' rather than the broad coverage of the top anchor.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The highly specific literary niche with concrete named examples (Zixu 子虚, Wuyou 乌有先生) makes it a clear niche with distinct triggers unlikely to conflict with other skills.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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
baojie/shiji-kb
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.