CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ljg-blind

盲区扫描——读昨天你与 AI 的全部对话,照出暴露的思维盲区(不是不懂的知识,是让某类真相一直看不见的思维习惯),再从微信读书挑一本书的一章精准补上,落成一篇完整分析笔记。Use when user says '扫盲区', '盲区', '照盲区', '看看我的思维盲区', '我昨天想漏了什么', 'blind spot', 'ljg-blind', '/ljg-blind', or wants yesterday's AI conversations analyzed for cognitive blind spots plus a targeted weread chapter to fill them. 可选参数:传一个日期(YYYY-MM-DD)扫那天而非昨天。NOT FOR 纵向深钻一个观点(用 ljg-think)、一个领域降秩(用 ljg-rank)、陪读一篇文本(用 ljg-read)、找一个领域的约束(用 ljg-constraint)。

75

Quality

94%

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

88%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.

A strong operational skill: the five-step workflow is fully executable with genuine validation checkpoints, fallbacks for thin data and failed searches, a self-check feedback loop, and gotchas covering real failure modes (404 on unencoded web-reader URLs). The main improvement levers are trimming the essayistic conceptual opening and moving supplementary style/org-syntax material to reference files so the main workflow stays lean.

Suggestions

Tighten the opening '盲区是什么' section to 2-3 lines — the five-signal list in the next section already operationalizes the concept, and the current prose framing repeats it.

Move 语气规则, org 严格语法, and the 和早信的分工 comparison into a reference file (e.g. references/style.md), keeping the main body to the definition, signals, criteria, and the five operational steps.

The external references (Tools/WeReadWebUrl.ts under ~/.agents/skills and PRINCIPAL_TELOS.md under LIFEOS) are machine-absolute paths rather than bundle-relative files — consider including the tool in the skill bundle so the reference resolves wherever the skill is installed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The operational core (five steps, bash/jq, curl, template, self-check) is dense and every line instructs, but the opening '盲区是什么' section is essayistic conceptual prose and the 语气规则 rules could be tightened — a few trimmable passages, though none re-explain knowledge Claude already has. Efficient with minor over-explanation fits anchor 4, not 5 (not lean throughout) and not 3 (padding is minor, not 'some unnecessary explanation' throughout).

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: a copy-paste bash/jq pipeline for extracting and filtering session logs, exact curl payloads with jq output formats for weread search and chapter lookup, the reading-time formula (wordCount / 280), the WeReadWebUrl.ts invocation, and a complete org-mode note template. Placeholders like <bookId> are deliberate parameterization, not pseudocode.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: the data-thin fallback ('宁可交白卷,不许编'), the rating threshold with a stated symptom-beats-score exception, the search-empty fallback to whole-book links, and a final 自检 checklist that sends failures back to step three ('没有就退回第三步'). This is a read-and-write-one-note flow, so no destructive/batch cap applies.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized single-file structure with clear section headers and one clearly signaled external tool reference (Tools/WeReadWebUrl.ts, one level deep), but at ~210 lines it exceeds the simple-skill threshold and supplementary sections (语气规则, org 严格语法, 和早信的分工) are inlined where reference files would keep the core workflow leaner — good structure with minor organization gaps fits anchor 4, not 5's appropriately-split ideal.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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: it states a concrete four-action pipeline, gives rich bilingual trigger phrases, documents an optional date parameter, and explicitly disambiguates against four sibling skills. Its only cost is length, but every clause carries capability or trigger information rather than padding.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — '读昨天你与 AI 的全部对话', '照出暴露的思维盲区', '从微信读书挑一本书的一章精准补上', '落成一篇完整分析笔记' — covering the skill's full pipeline with no gaps, matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (scan yesterday's conversations, expose the blind spot, pick a targeted weread chapter, write a full analysis note) and when, via a concrete 'Use when user says...' clause plus a parameter spec and a NOT FOR boundary.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural trigger coverage in both languages — '扫盲区', '照盲区', '看看我的思维盲区', '我昨天想漏了什么', 'blind spot', 'ljg-blind', '/ljg-blind' — including synonyms, natural phrasings, and the slash command.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (cognitive-blind-spot scanning of yesterday's AI conversations) with distinct triggers, and an explicit NOT FOR clause routing sibling intents to ljg-think / ljg-rank / ljg-read / ljg-constraint, minimizing overlap risk.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

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.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
lijigang/ljg-skills
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.