strategic-decision-famine-aid

Use when deciding whether to provide famine aid to a rival state. Balances humanitarian and strategic interests by consulting multiple advisors, weighing long-term diplomatic reputation against short-term military opportunity. Based on Qin's aid to Jin.

Quality

68%

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_020/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

70%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 is a concise, well-structured decision framework with a validation section, suiting an instruction-only skill. Its main gap is that the steps and validation are deliberative prompts rather than concrete, checkable procedures.

Suggestions

Tighten actionability with concrete decision aids, e.g. a weighted pros/cons table template or an explicit decision rule ('aid unless the rival recently attacked within N years and military gain is critical').

Strengthen validation into a hard checklist with pass/fail criteria rather than soft prompts, e.g. 'Confirm at least one hardline and one humanitarian advisor consulted: yes/no'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean, uses terse bullet steps, assumes Claude's intelligence, and avoids explaining background concepts Claude already knows; every line carries actionable content.	5 / 5
Actionability	It provides a clear sequence of deliberative steps but they are high-level directives ('Consider that famine and prosperity are cyclical events') rather than concrete, executable procedures or worked examples — appropriate for a decision framework but not copy-paste ready.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Steps are clearly numbered and sequenced with a Validation section, but the validation consists of soft checks ('Verify that multiple advisors... were consulted') rather than hard feedback-loop checkpoints for the risky go/no-go decision.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	For a short single-purpose skill with no bundle files, content is well-organized into clear sections (Overview, Steps, Decision Points, Expected Outcomes, Validation), which is appropriate and complete for its size.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

67%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-targeted to a distinct niche and explicitly answers both what and when. Its main weakness is trigger-term coverage limited to a single phrasing and slightly abstract action verbs.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger-term coverage by adding synonyms users might say, e.g. 'Use when deciding whether to send grain or food aid to a hostile or rival nation during a famine or food crisis.'

Make the concrete actions more tangible alongside the deliberative ones, e.g. 'weighs diplomatic reputation against military opportunity by consulting multiple advisors and evaluating pro/aid arguments'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and several concrete actions ('consulting multiple advisors', 'weighing long-term diplomatic reputation against short-term military opportunity'), giving specific substance, though the actions are deliberative rather than mechanical and somewhat abstract.	4 / 5
Completeness	It states both what it does ('Balances humanitarian and strategic interests by consulting multiple advisors, weighing...') and when to use it ('Use when deciding whether to provide famine aid to a rival state'), with the 'when' explicit but fairly narrow in scope.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It opens with 'Use when deciding whether to provide famine aid to a rival state', which is a natural trigger phrase, but coverage of synonyms or alternative phrasings users might say is limited to that single framing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is highly specific — famine aid to a rival state with diplomatic vs strategic tradeoffs — making it clearly distinguishable from other skills with minimal conflict risk.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 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_020/SKILL.md
Commit: 6b836e3

Reviewed: 5 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.