CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

product-review-report

编写专业产品评测报告,站在用户决策者与使用者双重视角深度评测产品。输入产品名称(以及可选的产品资料/链接、功能点、使用场景、竞品),自动搜集产品信息、竞品对比数据与行业数据,生成结论清晰、逻辑严谨、有理论依据与数据支撑、图文并茂的 Markdown 评测报告(SVG 图以外挂文件形式引用),输出到项目 markdown/ 目录。触发条件:用户提到"产品评测"、"写评测报告"、"帮我评测XX"、"product review"、"产品对比报告"、"帮我写XX的评测"、"功能评测"、"这个产品怎么样"、"XX和YY哪个更好"、"帮我做个产品调研"、"竞品分析"、"选型报告"。即使用户只提供了产品名称和希望"帮我看看这个产品",也应立即使用本 skill。

72

Quality

91%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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 well-built instruction-only skill body: fully executable templates and exact output/file specifications, a clearly sequenced workflow with data-integrity guardrails, and exemplary progressive disclosure into two accurately-described reference files. The main gaps are the absence of an output-validation step (checking that generated SVG assets exist and match referenced paths) and a few dimension/style sections that could be trimmed for token efficiency.

Suggestions

Add a post-generation validation step, e.g., 'verify every image reference in the report resolves to a file in markdown/assets/ and every H2 section from the template has substantive content before reporting completion', to close the workflow_clarity gap.

Tighten the evaluation-dimension bullet lists in 第三步 (e.g., collapse '响应速度、并发处理、已知故障记录' style enumerations) since Claude can expand these from the dimension names alone, improving token efficiency.

Move the detailed SVG color/font specifications into references/report-examples.md alongside the chart templates, keeping only the file-naming and external-reference rule inline, to further slim the always-loaded SKILL.md body.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely efficient: it never explains concepts Claude already knows (it names TCO, GDPR, SOC2 without defining them) and every section carries instructions. Minor over-explanation remains — e.g., the evaluation-dimension lists ('响应速度、并发处理、已知故障记录') restate common knowledge per dimension, and '适合流程图、时序图…' plus the writing-style items could be tightened. This fits the score-4 anchor ('efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed') rather than 5, since not every token earns its place, and clearly above 3 where unnecessary explanation is more than incidental.

4 / 5

Actionability

The guidance is fully executable for an instruction-only skill: an exact output file tree ('markdown/product-review-{产品名}-{YYYYMMDD}.md', named SVG assets), a copy-paste-ready report structure template down to H2/H3 headings, a literal image-reference snippet ('![评分雷达图](assets/score-radar.svg)'), exact SVG specs (viewBox, hex colors, font-family, 6–8 radar axes), and Mermaid fences. Specific examples cover the common cases, matching the score-5 anchor; it is not 4 because there are no meaningful gaps in executable detail.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-step sequence (询问信息 → 搜集研究 → 维度评测 → 竞品对比 → 生成报告 → 输出后提示) with an anti-fabrication checkpoint ('不要捏造数据。若无法查到某项数据…如实说明') and explicit instruction to skip re-asking for already-provided info. It does not reach 5 because there is no validation of the generated output (e.g., verifying the SVG files exist at the referenced paths and that every template H2 section has content) and no error-recovery loop; it stays above 3 because the sequence is explicit and a data-integrity checkpoint is present, and the operation is not destructive/batch so the ≤3 cap does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is a well-structured overview: workflow, evaluation framework, output structure, and style rules inline, with the bulky detail (scoring rubric per dimension, radar-chart SVG template, feature-matrix template) correctly split into 'references/scoring-rubric.md' and 'references/report-examples.md'. Both files exist, are one level deep, and are clearly signaled with per-file descriptions of their contents, exactly matching the score-5 anchor; it is not 4 because references are not merely 'mostly clear' — each is labeled with what it contains and nothing that belongs in a reference is inlined wholesale.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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 description: it explicitly states concrete capabilities with a defined output format and location, and provides an unusually thorough list of natural trigger phrases including synonyms, an English variant, and a catch-all clause. The only weakness is mild overlap risk with general research/调研-type skills from a few broad trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions: '站在用户决策者与使用者双重视角深度评测产品', '自动搜集产品信息、竞品对比数据与行业数据', '生成…Markdown 评测报告(SVG 图以外挂文件形式引用),输出到项目 markdown/ 目录'. These are specific, comprehensive capabilities with concrete output format and location, matching the score-5 anchor; no vague fluff beyond a minor '有理论依据' phrase.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: 'what' via the concrete capability list (dual-perspective evaluation, data gathering, Markdown report generation with SVG assets, output directory) and 'when' via the explicit '触发条件:' clause with concrete trigger phrases. This mirrors the score-5 example ('Extract text… Use when the user mentions…'); it does not fall to 4 because the 'when' is not merely present but enumerated with concrete phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It enumerates a comprehensive set of natural user phrases and their synonyms: '产品评测', '写评测报告', '帮我评测XX', 'product review', '产品对比报告', '帮我写XX的评测', '功能评测', '这个产品怎么样', 'XX和YY哪个更好', '帮我做个产品调研', '竞品分析', '选型报告', plus a catch-all ('即使…只提供了产品名称…也应立即使用本 skill'). This matches the comprehensive synonym coverage of the score-5 anchor; it is not merely 'some relevant keywords' (3) nor 'a few natural terms missing' (4).

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The cluster of triggers around product review reports ('产品评测', '写评测报告', '选型报告') is a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, matching mostly-distinct score-4 behavior. It does not reach 5 because broader terms like '竞品分析', '帮我做个产品调研', and '这个产品怎么样' could plausibly overlap with general market-research or research skills; it stays above 3 because the dominant triggers are unambiguously about product evaluation reports.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

digoal/blog

Path

skills/skills_for_claude_web/product-review-report/SKILL.md

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.