CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

nsfc-abstract

当用户明确要求"写/润色 NSFC 标书摘要""生成中文摘要和英文摘要""把中文摘要翻译成英文摘要"时使用。输出中文、英文两个版本(英文必须是中文的忠实翻译版),同时输出标题建议(1个推荐标题+5个候选标题及理由)。中文摘要默认≤400字符,英文摘要默认≤4000字符。输出方式:将结果写入工作目录下的 `NSFC-ABSTRACTS.md`。⚠️ 不适用:用户只想翻译一段与标书无关的通用文本(应直接翻译);用户只想写立项依据/研究内容/研究基础正文(应使用对应 nsfc 系列 skill)。

Quality

87%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%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.

The core workflow is excellent — a fully executable draft→validate→compress→re-validate loop with real deterministic scripts, bounded retries, and explicit escalation. Quality is dragged down by off-task boilerplate (bug-collection and common-constraint compliance blocks) and structural defects: a dangling `config.yaml` dependency, duplicated headings, and section headings swallowed by the output-template code fence.

Suggestions

Move the `bensz-collect-bugs` procedures and the "公共硬约束" compliance block into a shared reference file (or the skill's own reference), keeping SKILL.md focused on the abstract-generation workflow.

Resolve the dangling `config.yaml` references — either ship a `config.yaml` in the skill bundle or inline the default values (content_points_min/max, title_candidates_default, zh_recommended_sentences, output headings) directly in SKILL.md.

Fix the structure: merge the duplicate `### 输入` sections, and move `### 输出管理`/`### 校验` out of the fenced output template so they render as real headings.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The core guidance (five-sentence structure with percentage budget table, compression priorities P0/P1/P2, closed-loop validation) is dense and earns its tokens, but there are several padded sections unrelated to the task: the `bensz-collect-bugs`/`gh` bug-reporting steps ("优先使用 `bensz-collect-bugs` 按规范记录到 `~/.bensz-skills/bugs/`…") and the entire "公共硬约束" block about BAC audits, credentials, SSRF, and path traversal. Matches 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'; not 2 because the majority of the body is tight, task-specific instruction.

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance with copy-paste commands tied to real shipped scripts: "python3 skills/nsfc-abstract/scripts/validate_abstract.py - --json --diff --strict", "写入:python3 skills/nsfc-abstract/scripts/write_abstracts_md.py <input> --strict", stdin usage, an exact output template for `NSFC-ABSTRACTS.md`, and concrete post-write reporting steps. Both referenced scripts exist in `scripts/`. Matches the 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' anchor.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The hard-constraint path is a textbook feedback loop: "先检测,再压缩,再检测,合格后再写入" with a bounded retry ("最多 3 轮") and explicit escalation options when limits can't be met (delete info / relax `config.yaml` / user-supplied shorter summary), plus a 失败与恢复 section. Matches 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery'. Not 4 because validation checkpoints are deterministic-scripted and every failure branch has a defined next action.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References are one level deep and clearly signaled ("见 `skills/nsfc-abstract/references/info_form.md`", "遵循 `…/references/title-rules.md`"), and both files plus a scripts README exist — but organization has real gaps: the body repeatedly defers to a `config.yaml` ("以 `config.yaml:limits.content_points_min/max` 为准", `config.yaml:output.zh_heading`, etc.) that is not present in the bundle, `### 输入` appears twice (top level and under 流程), and the `### 输出管理`/`### 校验` headings are buried inside the output-template code fence where they render as template text. Matches 'some structure but could be better organized'.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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.

The description is exemplary: concrete actions with numeric limits and a defined output file, explicit 'use when' trigger phrases, and explicit non-goal boundaries that de-conflict against generic translation and sibling nsfc skills. The only gap is a few missing natural synonyms (e.g., 国自然) in the trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Quotes: "输出中文、英文两个版本(英文必须是中文的忠实翻译版)", "输出标题建议(1个推荐标题+5个候选标题及理由)", "中文摘要默认≤400字符,英文摘要默认≤4000字符", "将结果写入工作目录下的 `NSFC-ABSTRACTS.md`" — multiple specific concrete actions with concrete limits, output format, and destination, matching the 'comprehensive coverage' anchor. Not 4 because coverage of the skill's behavior has no material gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'what' ("输出中文、英文两个版本…同时输出标题建议", limits, write to `NSFC-ABSTRACTS.md`) and 'when' ("当用户明确要求…时使用") with concrete trigger phrases, plus explicit non-goals ("⚠️ 不适用:…"), matching the top anchor. Not 4 because both what and when are fully explicit with no vagueness.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes: "当用户明确要求"写/润色 NSFC 标书摘要"""生成中文摘要和英文摘要"""把中文摘要翻译成英文摘要"时使用" — natural phrasings users would actually say, with write/polish/translate variations. Not 5 because common synonyms like "国自然" or "申请书摘要" are absent, leaving a few natural terms uncovered.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (NSFC proposal abstracts) with explicit de-confliction: "用户只想翻译一段与标书无关的通用文本(应直接翻译);用户只想写立项依据/研究内容/研究基础正文(应使用对应 nsfc 系列 skill)" — minimal conflict risk with either generic translation or sibling skills. Not 4 because the boundaries are stated explicitly rather than merely implied.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

huangwb8/ChineseResearchLaTeX

Path

skills/nsfc-abstract/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.