AC think-plan
深度思考与规划 Skill。用于复杂任务的需求挖掘、方案设计和执行规划。 触发场景： 1. 用户说"帮我规划一下..."、"我想做一个..."、"分析一下这个方案" 2. 用户明确说"使用 think-plan"或"用思考规划 Skill" 3. 用户提出的任务需求不清晰、需要梳理 4. 用户需要多个可选方案对比 核心能力： - 批判性需求挖掘：客观指出用户想法的逻辑问题和认知偏差 - 自适应方案设计：根据复杂度决定单/多智能体架构 - 可落地执行规划：产出可直接执行的详细方案 工作流程：需求探讨 → 方案生成 → 执行实施
As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
Process rating: all ten parameters 59/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 77 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 769 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 268: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 34 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 77 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 3)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.