CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

warning-against-appeasement-policy

Use when evaluating territorial concessions or appeasement strategies against aggressive neighbors. Applies the 抱薪救火 (carrying firewood to extinguish fire) framework to expose why each concession emboldens further demands and weakens negotiating position.

67

Quality

80%

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_122/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 well-structured with a clear analytical workflow and explicit validation checkpoints, and appropriately self-contained for a simple skill. It is held back by mild redundancy in the analogy framing and the lack of a worked example that would make the framework fully actionable.

Suggestions

Merge the Overview and Core Principle so the firewood analogy is stated once, eliminating the repeated explanation and the description-duplicating opening line.

Add a brief worked example applying the four analysis steps to a concrete scenario, so the framework becomes copy-paste-ready rather than descriptive.

Tighten the Analysis Steps to read as imperative instructions ('Map the demand cycle', 'Identify advisor incentives') rather than statements about the framework.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean and free of general-knowledge padding, but the Overview and Core Principle sections restate the same firewood analogy, and the opening line repeats the description — it could be tightened. Not level 3 because of that redundancy; not level 1 because no tokens are spent explaining concepts Claude already knows.

2 / 3

Actionability

The Validation section gives concrete checks ('map remaining concession-able assets and project when they would be exhausted at current demand rate'), but the Analysis Steps read more as framework description than executable procedure, and there is no worked example showing the framework applied to a concrete case. This matches 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' rather than copy-paste-ready level 3.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear numbered Analysis sequence (1-4) is followed by an explicit Validation section with three verification checkpoints, giving a sequenced workflow with validation feedback rather than just listed steps.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

A simple, self-contained skill under 50 lines with no bundle files (references/scripts/assets absent) and well-organized sections (Overview, Core Principle, Analysis Steps, Expected Outcome, Validation), which the rubric allows to score 3 for simple skills.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

90%

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 description with an explicit trigger clause, clear what/when structure, and distinct niche vocabulary. The only weakness is specificity: it states the analytical purpose but does not list multiple discrete concrete actions.

Suggestions

Add 2-3 discrete concrete actions (e.g., 'maps the demand cycle', 'projects asset exhaustion', 'flags advisor self-interest') to lift specificity from a domain statement toward a multi-action list.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('territorial concessions or appeasement strategies against aggressive neighbors') and analytical actions ('evaluating', 'expose why each concession emboldens further demands'), but does not enumerate a comprehensive list of specific concrete actions as the level-3 anchor requires.

2 / 3

Completeness

Explicit 'Use when' clause answers when, and 'Applies the 抱薪救火 framework to expose why each concession emboldens further demands and weakens negotiating position' answers what, satisfying both halves.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases a user would actually say — 'territorial concessions', 'appeasement strategies', 'aggressive neighbors' — give good coverage of the relevant vocabulary.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is highly specific (appeasement/territorial-concession analysis tied to a named historical framework), making conflict with other skills unlikely.

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.