CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

natural-rewrite

在保持事实、语气和含义的前提下,把消息、邮件、评论、解释、社交媒体内容或文案改写得自然流畅。用于中文或英文润色、去除机器翻译感、微信回复、私信、邮件草稿、评论和简洁改写;不得添加未经确认的事实。

Quality

91%

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 tight, well-structured instruction skill: it specifies exactly what to preserve, how to judge register, what defaults to offer, what stock phrases to avoid, and how to format output, with an explicit verification checklist. The main defect is the dangling reference to examples/chinese-message.md — the promised example file is absent, which both weakens actionability and leaves a broken navigation link.

Suggestions

Fix the broken reference: either create examples/chinese-message.md with a worked input→output example (one per version label) or remove the link from the 验证 section.

Add one inline before/after example (e.g., a stiff WeChat reply rewritten as 直接版 and 温和版) so the register guidance is demonstrated, not just described.

Clarify step 5's failure handling — state what to do when the silent fact check fails (e.g., revise the version rather than emit it), completing the validate→fix loop.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~48-line body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what rewriting or tone is, and every line adds non-obvious guidance such as the exact list of stock phrases to avoid ("希望这封邮件找到你安好""诚挚地"…) and the precise output template. This matches 'every token earns its place'; it is not the anchor at 4 because there is no over-explanation to trim.

5 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is largely concrete: an explicit preservation list (人名、机构、数字、日期、URL、否定、承诺、归属、不确定性), a three-version default with exact labels, and a literal output template. However, no worked input→output example exists — the only one, [chinese-message.md](examples/chinese-message.md), is a broken reference to a non-existent file — so it falls at 'mostly executable guidance; minor gaps' rather than fully covering the common cases.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 工作流程 section sequences five explicit steps, including a silent validation step ("静默检查所有事实性约束仍然存在"), reinforced by a dedicated 验证 checklist section (事实、否定、数字、日期、URL、语气、格式 plus no-new-information check). This matches the anchor with explicit validation steps and a checklist; not 4 because validation is not implicit or partially missing, and this non-fragile rewrite task needs no error-recovery loop.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well organized into six clearly labeled sections with the right content inline for a sub-50-line simple skill, and its single reference is clearly signaled. It does not reach 5 because that one reference — examples/chinese-message.md — points to a file that does not exist in the bundle, a navigation defect; it stays above 3 because the structure itself is clean and nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

91%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: it states a precise what with an explicit factual-integrity constraint, and provides an explicit and concrete 'Use for…' trigger list rich in natural user phrasing, including platform-specific terms. Its only weaknesses are a single core action spread across contexts (rather than multiple distinct capabilities) and modest overlap with generic writing/editing skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("把消息、邮件、评论、解释、社交媒体内容或文案改写得自然流畅") and covers many concrete content types plus explicit actions (润色, 去除机器翻译感, 简洁改写), but the core action is a single rewrite operation applied across contexts rather than multiple distinct capabilities — matching 'several specific actions; minor gaps' rather than the comprehensive anchor at 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers 'what' ("在保持事实、语气和含义的前提下…改写得自然流畅" with an explicit constraint "不得添加未经确认的事实") and 'when' with the trigger clause "用于中文或英文润色、去除机器翻译感、微信回复、私信、邮件草稿、评论和简洁改写", matching the anchor that clearly and explicitly answers both with concrete trigger phrases. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is explicit and enumerates triggers rather than being merely adequate.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It covers the natural terms a user would actually say: 润色 (polish), 去除机器翻译感 (remove machine-translation feel), 微信回复 (WeChat reply), 私信 (DM), 邮件草稿 (email draft), 评论 (comment), and 简洁改写 (concise rewrite), including platform-specific synonyms. This matches the comprehensive-synonyms anchor; it is not one of the intermediate anchors that only have 'good keyword coverage' with natural terms missing.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Chinese/English natural-rewrite niche with platform-specific triggers (微信回复, 私信, 去除机器翻译感) is mostly distinct, but 'polish/rewrite text' broadly overlaps with general writing-assistant and editing skills. It matches 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills' and not 5, because generic 润色/改写 phrasing could pull it into writing tasks outside its scope.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

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

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

ooooooooooooooooooop/agent-tools

Path

skills/natural-rewrite/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.