SKILLEMALL.ai

BF knowledge-graph-extractor

从PDF/Word文档提取6级以上层次化知识节点,标注节点类型与语义关系,输出可导入超星在线课程的CSV/Excel文件(支持最高7级)。触发场景:用户需要从文档抽取知识点、构建知识图谱、生成结构化教学数据、导出知识点层级关系。关键词:知识图谱、知识节点、知识树、教学大纲、课程标准、知识点抽取、层次化知识

ClawHub Agent Skills author: flyboat403 v0.1.0 MIT-0 6 files body ≈ 2 506 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 34 h ago

从PDF/Word文档提取6级以上层次化知识节点,标注节点类型与语义关系,输出可导入超星在线课程的CSV/Excel文件(支持最高7级)。触发场景:用户需要从文档抽取知识点、构建知识图谱、生成结构化教学数据、导出知识点层级关系。关键词:知识图谱、知识节点、知识树、教学大纲、课程标准、知识点抽取、层次化知识

As a process F 31/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: examples/template-knowledge-graph.xlsx, examples/example-curriculum-office-software.pdf

ProcedureWordExcelAI and agentsData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
87/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
67
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
31/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: examples/template-knowledge-graph.xlsx, examples/example-curriculum-office-software.pdf
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
  2. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
For the model run — optional
  • 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: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: examples/template-knowledge-graph.xlsx
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: examples/example-curriculum-office-software.pdf

Process rating: all ten parameters 31/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: examples/template-knowledge-graph.xlsx, examples/example-curriculum-office-software.pdf
  • 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: examples/template-knowledge-graph.xlsx, examples/example-curriculum-office-software.pdf
  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 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
  • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (knowledge-graph-extractor) differs from the folder (knowledge-graph-extraction-skill)
  • 100Steps. 36 steps
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2506 tokens
  • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
  • low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

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

  • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
  • +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
  • +3Description length 153: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 43 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 36 items
  • +4Has examples (14 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 67.

External checks

ClawHub: clean
This appears to be a document-processing skill whose JSON editing behavior is purpose-aligned, with no evidence of malware, exfiltration, or hidden persistence.
LLM: benign (medium) · VirusTotal: · 9 Jul 2026