CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cs-brainstorm

模糊想法分诊。触发:用户想先聊、brainstorm、方向摇摆;不处理 bug/重构。

64

Quality

76%

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 ./plugins/codestable/skills/cs-brainstorm/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%

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

The content is highly actionable and well-sequenced with strong confirmation checkpoints and feedback loops. Its weaknesses are redundancy across the boundaries/errors sections and a monolithic structure that does not progressively split detailed material into reference files.

Suggestions

De-duplicate "硬性边界" and "常见错误" against the inline case rules they restate, keeping only net-new constraints to tighten conciseness.

Extract the detailed four-case logic and grill档 rules into a reference file (e.g. references/cases.md) and have SKILL.md overview + link to it, improving progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body avoids concept-padding and stays operational, but at ~265 lines it restates case rules and antipatterns across "硬性边界" and "常见错误" that already appear inline, so it could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Verbatim dialogue templates, exact file paths, a formal Haskell routing spec, and concrete case signals give fully actionable, copy-paste-ready guidance for an instruction skill.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Sequences (开聊前检查, 挖问题→发散→收敛, per-case 信号/处理/落盘/退出) are explicit, with confirmation checkpoints ("确认前不启动下游主流程") and 升降级 feedback loops plus checklists.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

References to .codestable/reference/*.md are one-level-deep and signaled, but the 265-line SKILL.md is monolithic — detailed case logic and grill rules stay inline rather than being split into bundle files.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

75%

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 efficiently answers both what and when with an explicit trigger clause and clear exclusions that sharpen its niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term coverage and a single abstract action verb rather than multiple concrete actions.

Suggestions

Add common natural trigger variations users actually say, e.g. "想法/探讨/讨论方向/还没想清楚", alongside "brainstorm/想先聊".

Replace or supplement the abstract "分诊" with one or two concrete actions (e.g. "对齐真问题、发散候选方向、收敛后落盘") to lift specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"模糊想法分诊" names the domain and a single action (triage) plus explicit exclusions ("不处理 bug/重构"), but does not enumerate multiple concrete actions.

2 / 3

Completeness

"模糊想法分诊" answers what and the explicit "触发:" clause answers when, satisfying the explicit-trigger requirement that avoids the completeness cap of 2.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

"想先聊" and "brainstorm" are natural user terms, but "方向摇摆" is literary rather than verbatim user speech and common variations like "想法/探讨/讨论方向" are missing.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The explicit negative scope ("不处理 bug/重构") combined with a focused brainstorm/fuzzy-idea niche makes it clearly distinguishable and unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

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
codestable/CodeStable
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.