A compact, well-structured orchestrator skill: clear stage sequencing with an explicit validation gate, concrete sub-skill delegation, and clean one-level-deep references. The gaps are modest — some redundancy across sections and an unspecified validation criterion (which files, what check) plus no fix-retry loop for stage failures.

Suggestions

Make the inter-stage gate executable by listing the expected output file(s) and the concrete check for each of the three stages (fetch / review / notes), instead of the unspecified "预期文件已生成且检查通过".

Add a brief failure-recovery instruction (e.g., retry once after fixing, or stop and report the recorded stage/reason to the user) so the batch pipeline has a validate→fix→retry feedback loop.

Trim redundancy: the intro's three trigger phrases and the 自动化 section's restatement of 'one-shot pipeline entry' largely duplicate the frontmatter description and could be collapsed.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean overall (~40 lines, no concept explanations Claude would already know), but there is minor duplication: the intro repeats the three user phrases already in the frontmatter, the 执行原则 alias list partially repeats them again, and the 自动化 section restates the intro's "one-shot pipeline entry" point. This fits 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' (4) rather than 'every token earns its place' (5), and is well above the verbose anchors.	4 / 5
Actionability	Guidance is mostly executable for an orchestrator skill: concrete time-range alias mapping, explicit links to the three sub-skills to execute in order, what to report at the end, and routing rules for single-step requests. It falls short of 5 because the validation gate "预期文件已生成且检查通过" never specifies which files each stage must produce or what the check is, leaving the executor to infer the pass criteria; it is above 3 because the delegation steps themselves are concrete and specific.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 5-step sequence with an explicit inter-stage gate ("只有当前阶段的预期文件已生成且检查通过，才进入下一阶段") and a failure protocol ("发生失败时记录阶段和原因，保留已完成产物"), which exceeds the anchor-4 example's bare 'verify output'. It is not 5 because there is no fix-and-retry feedback loop after a failure and the per-stage check criterion is left unspecified — minor validation gaps rather than the missing checkpoints of anchor 3.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with well-organized sections and no content that belongs in separate files; all references (../_shared/agent-runtime.md and the three sibling SKILL.md links) are clearly signaled markdown links exactly one level deep, with no nested reference chains. Per the simple-skill note, this earns 5 — no bundle files exist to restructure.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

91%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 answers both what and when, in third person, with five natural trigger phrases including colloquial variants. The only weakness is that the stated actions are pipeline stage names rather than concrete deliverables, and there is minor trigger overlap with the three sibling sub-skills it orchestrates.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ("每日论文推荐") and lists the three concrete chained actions ("论文抓取、推荐生成、重点论文笔记") rather than being generic. It stays at 4 rather than 5 because the actions are pipeline stage names — it never states the concrete deliverables (e.g., what recommendation file or notes are produced) — and at 4 rather than 3 because several distinct actions are explicitly listed with only minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	Both questions are answered explicitly: what ("内部会自动串联论文抓取、推荐生成、重点论文笔记三步，无需用户手动拆开") and when ("用户说…时使用" with concrete trigger phrases). It clearly matches the anchor-5 example pattern of an explicit 'Use when…' clause with concrete triggers plus a stated capability list, so neither 4 (which requires a less explicit 'when') nor 3 (which requires a missing/weak 'when') fits.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Five natural user phrasings are given, including colloquial variants: "今日论文推荐", "过去3天论文推荐", "过去一周论文推荐", "最近3天论文", "看看这周有啥论文" — exactly the variations a user would naturally say. Not 4 because coverage of natural synonyms is comprehensive, not 'a few missing'; file extensions are absent only because they are inapplicable to this domain.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It carves a clear niche (the one-shot daily-papers pipeline entry) with trigger phrases centered on the aggregate 'recommendation' intent, giving minimal conflict risk with unrelated skills. It is 4 rather than 5 because the sibling sub-skills (fetch/review/notes) cover overlapping territory and a phrase like "今日论文" could plausibly be intended as a single-step request; it is well above 3 because the stated triggers are clearly pipeline-level.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 4 suspicious	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: huangkiki/dailypaper-skills
Path: skills/daily-papers/SKILL.md
Commit: 10c9921

Reviewed: 1 day 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.