BF method-grammar-diagnostic
诊断心理学论文Method部分的语法与句法问题,检查时态、被动语态、句子结构规范,输出评分与顶刊正例参考
诊断心理学论文Method部分的语法与句法问题,检查时态、被动语态、句子结构规范,输出评分与顶刊正例参考
As a process F 35/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/../01-reference/Science-Research-Writing-Second-Edition_102-167.pdf, references/examples/positive/, references/examples/positive/_INDEX.json
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.
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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenSKILL.md:8High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (detector / deny-list definition)source: Scie…on_§2.5.1
detector
Files scanned: 51. 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/../01-reference/Science-Research-Writing-Second-Edition_102-167.pdf - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/examples/positive/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/examples/positive/_INDEX.json
Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100
Will not run. References files that are not bundled: references/../01-reference/Science-Research-Writing-Second-Edition_102-167.pdf, references/examples/positive/, references/examples/positive/_INDEX.json
- 0Tools and files. 3 referenced file(s) missing: references/../01-reference/Science-Research-Writing-Second-Edition_102-167.pdf, references/examples/positive/, references/examples/positive/_INDEX.json
- 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
- 100Steps. 32 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2307 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)
- +3Description length 52: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 21 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 32 items
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 61.
External checks
ClawHub: clean
This is a non-executable academic writing diagnostic skill with no evidence of hidden commands, credential use, persistence, or data exfiltration.
LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 26 Aug 2026