CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

opensourcefaq

解答与开源产品有关的深度技术问题,输出图文并茂的 Markdown 技术文章。触发条件:用户提出与开源项目(如 PostgreSQL、Redis、Kafka、Kubernetes、ClickHouse、Flink 等)相关的技术问题,并提供源码目录或 URL、deepwiki repo 名称。即使用户只说"帮我解答这个开源问题"或"分析一下这个项目的某个机制",也应使用本 skill。输出文章保存到项目 markdown/ 目录,要求直击问题、图文并茂、有实操细节和原理分析。

62

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/skills_for_claude_web/opensourcefaq/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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.

A thorough, well-sequenced workflow with strong validation and concrete tool guidance for a complex multi-phase task. The main weaknesses are moderate verbosity in template/filtering sections and a complete lack of progressive disclosure — everything lives inline with no reference files.

Suggestions

Move the article-structure template and the network-article ✓/✗ filtering criteria into a reference file (e.g. references/article-template.md) and link to it from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure and reduce inline tokens.

Tighten Phase 4 validation by replacing abstract checkboxes with concrete, executable verification steps (e.g. specific commands or tool calls) to lift workflow clarity toward 5.

Trim repeated guidance — the '注意事项' section restates version-sensitivity and practical-detail themes already covered in Phases 2–4; consolidate to improve conciseness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the network-article ✓/✗ filtering list, the full article-structure template, and repeated checklist items in Phase 4 are padding that could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete tool calls (grep -rn, find, cat, web_fetch, deepwiki:read_wiki_structure/read_wiki_contents/ask_question, web_search) and specific output conventions (markdown/<keyword-project>.md, UTF-8); as an instruction-only skill the absence of runnable code is acceptable, but no copy-paste examples cover common cases, capping it below 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear Phase 0→4 sequence with checklists and feedback loops ('如有缺失,简短追问', '如有出入,更新文章以源码为准'); validation in Phase 4 is mostly abstract checkboxes rather than executable validation commands, leaving a minor gap versus the 5-anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good section structure (clear ## / ### phases), but there are no bundle files and all content — the article template, filtering criteria, and checklists — is inlined in a ~240-line file that could benefit from one-level-deep reference files.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong, well-structured description that clearly states both capability and explicit trigger conditions with natural user phrases and concrete project examples. Its main weakness is that the core actions ('answer questions', 'output articles') are slightly generic compared to the most concrete anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ('解答与开源产品有关的深度技术问题', '输出图文并茂的 Markdown 技术文章', '保存到项目 markdown/ 目录', '有实操细节和原理分析'); slightly less concrete than the comprehensive 5-anchor since 'answer questions'/'output articles' remain somewhat generic.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (解答深度技术问题并输出 Markdown 文章) and 'when' via a concrete '触发条件' clause with multiple trigger phrases, matching the 5-anchor; not capped at 3 because explicit trigger guidance is present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage with named projects (PostgreSQL, Redis, Kafka, Kubernetes, ClickHouse, Flink) and natural user phrases ('帮我解答这个开源问题', '分析一下这个项目的某个机制'); a few common synonyms/extensions are missing, so not a 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Niche is mostly distinct — it requires a source directory/URL plus a deepwiki repo name and targets named open-source projects — but broad phrasing like '分析一下这个项目的某个机制' creates minor overlap with general code-explanation skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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
digoal/blog
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.