CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

nsfc-ref-alignment

检查 NSFC 标书正文引用与参考文献的一致性与真实性风险(只读):核查 bibkey 是否存在、BibTeX 字段与 DOI 等格式问题,并生成结构化输入供宿主 AI 逐条评估“正文表述是否真的在引用该文献”;默认仅输出审核报告,不直接修改标书或 .bib(除非用户明确要求)。

57

Quality

66%

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 ./skills/nsfc-ref-alignment/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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 body is a well-structured, actionable overview with a concrete runnable script, clear four-step workflow, validation checklist, and strict read-only modification boundaries. It is slightly verbose from repeated workspace-path definitions and would gain from an explicit validate→fix→retry loop and tighter deduplication.

Suggestions

Deduplicate the task-workspace path definition to a single canonical location and reference it elsewhere instead of restating it with varying formats.

Promote the static validation checklist into an explicit feedback loop inside the workflow (run script → check 4 artifacts exist → if missing, re-run with diagnostics).

Replace the placeholder cwd `/path/to/ChineseResearchLaTeX` with a parameterized or relative form so the command is copy-paste ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's LaTeX/BibTeX knowledge, but the task-workspace path is repeated across three sections in slightly varying formats and some explanatory prose could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides a concrete, runnable bash command with real flags (--project-root, --prepare, --verify-online) and concrete input/output filenames, with the invoked script run_ref_alignment.py confirmed present in the bundle; the core semantic step is procedural (justifiably the host AI's job) and the command uses a placeholder cwd.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Four clearly sequenced steps plus a static self-check checklist and explicit destructive-guard modification boundaries; just short of 5 because the checklist is a static list rather than an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop embedded in the workflow.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized overview with the real script run_ref_alignment.py invoked by concrete one-level-deep command references and no nested pointer chains; could be 5 with explicit per-script reference links, but the structure is already clear and navigable.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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 specific and distinctive with good domain keyword coverage and concrete actions, but it omits an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, capping completeness. It would benefit from a concrete 'Use when ...' sentence.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when reviewing an NSFC LaTeX proposal for citation/reference consistency or before submission.'

Replace the generic '等格式问题' with a short enumerated list of the specific field/format checks (DOI, year, author, venue).

Include a natural-language synonym like '引文核查/文献核查' to broaden trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — "核查 bibkey 是否存在、BibTeX 字段与 DOI 等格式问题,并生成结构化输入供宿主 AI 逐条评估" — but the trailing "等格式问题" leaves coverage slightly open rather than fully enumerated.

4 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (consistency/authenticity checking of citations vs references, read-only, report-only) but no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause; per guideline a missing explicit when caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong domain keywords present (NSFC 标书, 引用, 参考文献, bibkey, BibTeX, .bib) including a file extension, but lacks common synonyms like 引文/文献核查.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (NSFC 标书 citation/reference alignment, read-only) with minimal conflict risk, though acknowledged overlap with related skills nsfc-bib-manager and check-review-alignment keeps it just below 5.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

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.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
huangwb8/ChineseResearchLaTeX
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.