BC wisely-read-ppt
解析 PPT(.pptx) 或 PDF 文件(或两者同时提供),逐页生成结构化的 docx 解析文档。每页固定包含:整页截图、可编辑文字整理、插图描述(文字中以行内标记形式嵌入)。当用户需要:把演示文稿或 PDF 转成可编辑的逐页 Word 文档、提取 PPT 内容为文字稿、做 PPT/PDF 的图文解析稿、'逐页解析'、'生成解析文件'、'转 docx'、'PPT 解析'、'PDF 解析'时使用。
解析 PPT(.pptx) 或 PDF 文件(或两者同时提供),逐页生成结构化的 docx 解析文档。每页固定包含:整页截图、可编辑文字整理、插图描述(文字中以行内标记形式嵌入)。当用户需要:把演示文稿或 PDF 转成可编辑的逐页 Word 文档、提取 PPT 内容为文字稿、做 PPT/PDF…
As a process C 51/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill contains commands that delete files, rewrite disks or execute code fetched from the network. The agent may run them without asking if it believes the instructions require it.
Replace destructive commands with safe equivalents that ask for confirmation, scope them to one folder, and stop piping curl into a shell: pin a version and a checksum.
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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-shell-rcreference/macos-install.md:56Writes to a shell startup fileecho 'export PATH="$HOME/.local/bin:$PATH"' >> ~/.zshrc
Files scanned: 6. 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 51/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 66 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2211 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- 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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 201: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 24 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 66 items
- +4Has examples (14 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.