embodiment-description

Write detailed embodiment descriptions for patent specifications. Use when user says "撰写实施例", "write embodiment", "实施例描述", "detailed description", or wants to describe how to practice an invention.

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

85%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable with a clear, validated six-step workflow and clean single-file organization. Its single weakness is conciseness: the 'no experimental data' rule is repeated across many bullets and WRONG/RIGHT pairs where one consolidated rule would suffice.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated prohibitions on experimental data (the CRITICAL bullets, WRONG/RIGHT pairs, and 'NOT an experiment' bullet) into a single concise rule to reduce redundant tokens in the conciseness dimension.

The two 'WRONG/RIGHT' example pairs overlap; keep one representative pair and drop the redundant restatement to tighten the Key Rules section.

The 'If the source material is a paper, extract ONLY...' bullet largely restates earlier rules — merge it into the primary no-experimental-data rule.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with useful templates and tables, but the prohibition on experimental data is restated many times ('NO experimental data', 'NOT an experiment', 'Do NOT describe repeated experiments', and two more reinforcing bullets plus WRONG/RIGHT pairs), which is redundant padding that could be tightened into one rule. It does not fall to 1 because most tokens earn their place and it avoids explaining basic concepts.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides concrete, copy-ready guidance: an embodiment-planning table, exact opening-paragraph phrasing, step-templated language with figure numerals, a claim-support verification table, and a worked step-numbered example — fully actionable rather than abstract.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A six-step workflow is clearly sequenced with an explicit verification checkpoint (Step 4 claim-support verification with 'If any claim element lacks embodiment support, add the necessary description'), satisfying the feedback-loop requirement.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist in references/, scripts/, or assets/ and the body contains no nested multi-level references; content is organized into well-labeled sections (Constants, Inputs, Workflow, Key Rules) appropriate for a single-file skill.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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 strong: it pairs a clear statement of purpose with an explicit 'Use when' trigger list that includes bilingual variants, giving good completeness and low conflict risk. Its only weakness is specificity — it names one action rather than enumerating several concrete operations.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain ('embodiment descriptions for patent specifications') and a single action ('Write detailed embodiment descriptions') but does not enumerate multiple concrete actions like a level-3 anchor would; it stays at one verb rather than a list of distinct operations.	2 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what ('Write detailed embodiment descriptions for patent specifications') and when (an explicit 'Use when...' clause with enumerated triggers), matching the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It provides good coverage of natural trigger terms users would actually say, including bilingual variants ("撰写实施例", "实施例描述", "write embodiment", "detailed description") plus the descriptive 'wants to describe how to practice an invention'.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The patent/embodiment niche is distinct and the triggers (e.g., '撰写实施例', 'write embodiment') are unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, so conflict risk is low.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

87%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep
Commit: 82076e5

Reviewed: 5 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.