BF alibabacloud-dns-resolve-diagnose-customer
Alicloud DNS Diagnostic Skill (Read-Only). Diagnostic tool for domain unreachable, DNS resolution failure, DNS record not taking effect, NXDOMAIN, unknownhost, and other DNS-layer issues. Automatically performs WHOIS lookup, recursive tracing, OpenAPI config verification, and nationwide probing via boce to generate diagnostic reports. Covers Alibaba Cloud DNS, GTM, PrivateZone, and third-party DNS. This skill is read-only and will NOT execute any Create, Update, Delete, or other write operations. Triggers: "DNS resolution failed", "domain unreachable", "DNS not working", "NXDOMAIN", "domain ping failed", "DNS diagnose", "quick check", "快速检查", "DNS record check", "记录解析", "DNS resolution status", "解析状态", "check A/CNAME/MX/TXT record"
Alicloud DNS Diagnostic Skill (Read-Only).
As a process F 52/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/ram-policies.md, references/verification-method.md, references/api-reference.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.
- 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: 0. 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/ram-policies.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/verification-method.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/api-reference.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/acceptance-criteria.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 52/100
- 0Tools and files. 4 referenced file(s) missing: references/ram-policies.md, references/verification-method.md, references/api-reference.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 11 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 60Steps. 16 steps, 9 vague phrases
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4254 tokens
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Failures and branches. 7 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 14 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (5 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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 10 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 741: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 23 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 16 items
- +4Has examples (10 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.