SKILLEMALL.ai

BC learn-feynman

当用户学完一个东西想自查是否真懂、或觉得「好像懂了」但不确定时使用。用「费曼学习法」让他用自己的话把概念讲出来,你扮好奇学生专挑他含糊/跳过的地方追问,把「讲不顺的模糊处」揪出来作为没真懂的漏洞,定位是缺前置知识还是没想透,判断理解是否闭环。触发场景:我学完了考考我、自查一下、我好像懂了、我讲讲你看对不对、检验我的理解、这个我真懂了吗。

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Evan v1.0.0 MIT-0 2 files body ≈ 202 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 2 d ago

当用户学完一个东西想自查是否真懂、或觉得「好像懂了」但不确定时使用。用「费曼学习法」让他用自己的话把概念讲出来,你扮好奇学生专挑他含糊/跳过的地方追问,把「讲不顺的模糊处」揪出来作为没真懂的漏洞,定位是缺前置知识还是没想透,判断理解是否闭环。触发场景:我学完了考考我、自查一下、我好像懂了、我讲讲你看对不对、检验我的理…

As a process C 50/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

Proceduretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
87/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
68
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
50/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
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.
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: 2. 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")

Process rating: all ten parameters 50/100

  • 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
  • 75Steps. 3 steps
  • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 202 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

  • +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
  • +4No input/output examples
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 169: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 9 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 3 items

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 68.

External checks

ClawHub: clean
This appears to be a low-risk learning skill; its main issue is that broad trigger wording could activate it when the user only meant a generic self-check.
LLM: benign (medium) · VirusTotal: · 2 Jun 2026