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)。

61

Quality

72%

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

70%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 actionable and well-sequenced with explicit validation and recovery, but it is padded with redundant sections and inline boilerplate, and it underuses progressive disclosure for its bundle of helper scripts.

Suggestions

Remove the duplicate "输入" section under 流程 (it repeats the 适用场景/输入 block) and consolidate shared "公共硬约束" boilerplate into a referenced file.

Add brief one-line pointers to the helper scripts (bib_utils, latex_scanner, online_verify, report_utils, runtime_utils) so the bundle structure is navigable.

Externalize the detailed report-format spec into a reference doc and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly task-focused, but it carries redundant duplicate "输入" sections and a lengthy shared "公共硬约束" boilerplate block that could be tightened or externalized.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready bash commands with full paths and flags for the verified run_ref_alignment.py script, plus explicit output file paths; minor gaps in the JSON schema detail.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–4 are clearly sequenced with a dedicated 校验 checklist and a 失败与恢复 feedback loop (retry from the last failed step); validation is present, so the batch-operation cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Has clear section headers and points to the main script, but the ~150-line body inlines shared boilerplate and never navigates to the five helper scripts; no references/ or assets/ structure exists.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 well-scoped to a clear niche with strong concrete actions, but it omits an explicit "Use when…" trigger clause, which caps completeness and limits trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit "Use when…" trigger clause (e.g., when the user is preparing/reviewing an NSFC 标书 and wants to audit citation-reference consistency).

Add a couple of natural user-side phrasings (e.g., "引用核查", "参考文献核对") alongside the technical terms.

Consider a one-line note distinguishing this skill from nsfc-bib-manager directly in the description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "核查 bibkey 是否存在", "BibTeX 字段与 DOI 等格式问题", "生成结构化输入", "输出审核报告" — giving comprehensive coverage of the skill's capabilities.

5 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clearly stated, but there is no explicit "Use when…" clause or equivalent trigger guidance; per the rubric this caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage with natural domain terms (NSFC 标书, 引用, 参考文献, bibkey, BibTeX, DOI, .bib), but a few common user phrasings are absent and there is no explicit trigger clause.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Narrowly scoped to NSFC proposal citation/reference integrity, a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

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.