BF wechat-layout
微信公众号排版引擎 — 把 Markdown 文章转换为可直接粘贴进公众号编辑器、粘贴后样式不丢失的 HTML（样式内联 + <span leaf=""> 包裹）。也从任意公众号文章 URL 自动提取视觉风格并生成匹配的组件库。触发词：公众号排版 / 微信排版 / 公众号文章 / gzh / 排成公众号 / 粘到公众号 / 提取风格 / 分析排版 / 模仿公众号 / 风格提取 / 主题提取 / 参考这篇文章的风格 / format for WeChat / WeChat article formatting。不适用于：PPT/幻灯片（用 x-design）、UI 原型设计（用 x-design）、非公众号平台的排版。
微信公众号排版引擎 — 把 Markdown 文章转换为可直接粘贴进公众号编辑器、粘贴后样式不丢失的 HTML（样式内联 + <span leaf=""> 包裹）。也从任意公众号文章 URL 自动提取视觉风格并生成匹配的组件库。触发词：公众号排版 / 微信排版 / 公众号文章 / gzh / 排成公众号 /…
As a process F 16/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/theme-{name}.md, references/theme-{brand}.md
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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: 24. 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") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/theme-{name}.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/theme-{brand}.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 16/100
- 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: references/theme-{name}.md, references/theme-{brand}.md
- 0Steps. Prose only: no discrete steps
- 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 (wechat-layout) differs from the folder (wechatlayout)
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1931 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable
- medium 14 test cases, all positive: not one "should refuse" or "should ask first"
- low No test case covers injection arriving through data
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)
- +3No numbered steps or checklist
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 312: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (12 of 14)
- +3All 5 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 67.