CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

lark-mail

飞书邮箱:Use when user mentions 起草邮件、写邮件、草稿、发送/回复/转发邮件、查阅邮件、看邮件、搜索邮件、邮件文件夹、邮件标签、邮件联系人、监听新邮件、邮件收信规则等;use for mail/email intent only. Do not use for docs/sheets/calendar/auth setup/pure contact lookup/IM chat tasks.

Quality

86%

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

85%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.

Excellent operational content: copy-paste-ready commands, a disciplined shortcut-vs-raw-API decision path, and strong safety/validation workflows for destructive and batch mail operations, all properly externalized into 31 well-signaled reference files. The main cost is token weight from repeated safety rules and a partially redundant concept glossary in an already long body.

Suggestions

Consolidate the send-confirmation rule, currently stated in 安全规则 #5, the 数据真实性 section, the 命令选择 bullets, and the 默认话术 list — state it once authoritatively and cross-reference it elsewhere to cut duplicated tokens.

Merge the 草稿回链规则 (安全规则 #8) with the overlapping 默认话术 bullets at the end of 典型工作流, which repeat the same draft-link handling.

Trim the 核心概念 glossary to only Lark-specific semantics (message_id/thread_id, folder IDs, rule/template resources) and drop definitions of concepts Claude already knows, such as what an email, attachment, or reply thread is.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly operational and dense with non-obvious CLI specifics, but the send-confirmation rule is stated four times (安全规则 #5, the 数据真实性 intro, the 命令选择 bullets, and the 默认话术 list) and the draft-link rule twice, and the 核心概念 glossary partly explains concepts Claude already knows (what an email/attachment/thread is). It fits 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than the minor-instances anchor 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable throughout: exact commands with flags ("lark-cli mail +send --to alice@example.com --subject '周报' --body '<p>...'"), copy-paste JSON for --params/--data, a table mapping schema fields to CLI flags, and a concrete 3-step raw-API procedure with worked GET/POST examples.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 11-step 典型工作流 is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: identity confirmation via profile, confirmation previews with affected counts for destructive/batch ops ("将删除 N 封邮件,确认?"), post-send send_status verification, optional +lint-html precheck, and mandatory -h discovery before any raw API call — including error-recovery guidance (fix and re-query).

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The SKILL.md is an overview plus quick-reference, with all 31 per-operation details split into one-level-deep references/ files that all exist and are clearly signaled in the shortcuts table and 'ref:' links; templates live in assets/templates/ (5 real HTML files). Navigation is easy and nothing nests more than one level.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

86%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: exhaustive natural trigger phrases in both Chinese and English, explicit use-boundaries against adjacent skills, and a clearly scoped mail-only intent. Its only weakness is that the skill's actual capabilities are conveyed through trigger nouns rather than an explicit 'what it does' statement.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates many concrete capability areas ("起草邮件、写邮件、草稿、发送/回复/转发邮件、查阅邮件、看邮件、搜索邮件、邮件文件夹、邮件标签、邮件联系人、监听新邮件、邮件收信规则") but never states in verb form what the skill actually does — the 'what' is only the domain label "飞书邮箱", leaving minor gaps versus the comprehensive anchor 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and concrete ("Use when user mentions ... 等"), but the 'what' is only implied by the domain label and trigger nouns rather than explicitly stated as actions, so it does not fully reach the both-explicit anchor 5; it clearly exceeds anchor 3 where 'when' is missing.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural-language trigger coverage including synonyms and variations ("起草邮件" vs "写邮件", "查阅邮件" vs "看邮件", plus "搜索邮件", "监听新邮件", "邮件收信规则") alongside English terms ("mail/email intent"), matching the comprehensive-synonyms anchor.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (Lark/Feishu mailbox operations) with an explicit negative boundary ("Do not use for docs/sheets/calendar/auth setup/pure contact lookup/IM chat tasks") and a scoping clause ("use for mail/email intent only"), giving minimal conflict risk with sibling Lark skills.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

75%

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

Validation — 12 / 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

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 suspicious

Warning

Total

12

/

16

Passed

Repository

larksuite/cli

Path

skills/lark-mail/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.