CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

invention-structuring

Structure a raw invention idea into a formal invention disclosure. Use when user says "构建发明", "structure invention", "发明构建", "invention disclosure", or wants to formalize a rough idea into a patent-ready structure.

68

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%

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

The body is concise, well-sequenced, and includes an explicit validation step with graceful fallback, making conciseness and workflow clarity strong. Actionability and progressive disclosure are weaker: the output is a placeholder template and the single referenced shared file does not exist.

Suggestions

Make the shared reference real or remove it: create ../shared-references/patent-writing-principles.md (the Problem-Solution-Advantage framework and claimable-subject-matter guidelines) so the "Load ..." instruction is not a broken path.

Tighten actionability by replacing placeholder output fields ([invention title], [formal problem statement]) with worked example values or explicit derivation instructions tied to the input artifacts.

Consider moving the claim-category, drawing-plan, and output-template tables into a reference file so the SKILL.md body stays an overview, improving progressive-disclosure depth to one level.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what a patent or claim is, and every section (framework, decomposition, tables, dependency map) earns its place, matching the 3-anchor of efficient content where every token counts.

3 / 3

Actionability

It provides concrete reference material (claim-category table, dependency-map example, a real mcp__codex__codex call config) but the production steps are descriptive ("Determine what categories", "Plan what figures") and the output is a placeholder skeleton ([invention title], [formal problem statement]) rather than copy-paste-ready guidance, fitting the 2-anchor of concrete but incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 7 steps are clearly sequenced and Step 6 is an explicit validation checkpoint, with graceful degradation in Key Rules ("If mcp__codex__codex is not available, skip cross-model validation and note it"), matching the 3-anchor of a clear sequence with explicit validation and error recovery.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned and its one external reference is clearly signaled ("Load ../shared-references/patent-writing-principles.md for the Problem-Solution-Advantage framework"), but no references/scripts/assets bundle exists and that shared-references path is broken (file absent), while heavy tables and the output template live inline — fitting the 2-anchor of decent structure with signaling/organization gaps rather than the 3-anchor of well-split one-level references.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

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 well-targeted with explicit bilingual triggers and a clear Use-when clause, giving it strong completeness and distinctiveness. Its only weakness is specificity, since it names a single structuring action rather than enumerating multiple concrete operations.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain and one concrete action — "Structure a raw invention idea into a formal invention disclosure" — but does not list multiple distinct concrete actions (compare the 3-anchor "Extract text..., fill forms, merge documents"). It is not a 1 because the single structuring action is specific rather than vague.

2 / 3

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("Structure a raw invention idea into a formal invention disclosure") and when ("Use when user says ... or wants to formalize a rough idea into a patent-ready structure"), matching the 3-anchor that requires an explicit "Use when" clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural terms a user would say in both English and Chinese — "构建发明", "structure invention", "发明构建", "invention disclosure", and "formalize a rough idea into a patent-ready structure" — giving good coverage rather than just one keyword.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The patent-invention-disclosure niche is narrow with highly specific triggers, making it unlikely to fire for unrelated skills; this matches the 3-anchor of a clear niche with distinct triggers.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

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.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

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
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.