BF a-share-dragon-tiger-report
生成 A 股「涨停板龙虎榜深度研判报告」v2.0（21 章结构编号 0–21 + 22 条计算口径 + 财富密码融合层）， 按四层漏斗 L1→L2→L2.5→L3 框架（六条已确认口径 v2，含半年口径 + 增速红线）， 输出 HTML / PDF / PPTX 三件套；内置「十五五 18 方向跟踪池（102 板块 + 12 SW1 + 70 股）」 及三层核验生成器（reports/build_15th5_report.py），可离线复现 WorkBuddy 侧完整产出。 当用户要求生成龙虎榜报告、涨停板深度研判、每日收盘复盘、十五五方向四层核验、 或把 westock / IMA 盘面写入机构风研报时使用。仅交易日生成；非交易日应直接说明休市并结束。 v1.1（21 章 + §16+，26–38 页 PDF，26 页 PPTX）已被 v2.0 取代： v2.0 新增 framework/ 跟踪池数据（102 板块 + 12 SW1 + 70 股 + 口径 v2 结论）与 reports/ 18 方向生成器。
生成 A 股「涨停板龙虎榜深度研判报告」v2.0（21 章结构编号 0–21 + 22 条计算口径 + 财富密码融合层）， 按四层漏斗 L1→L2→L2.5→L3 框架（六条已确认口径 v2，含半年口径 + 增速红线）， 输出 HTML / PDF / PPTX 三件套；内置「十五五 18 方向跟踪池（102 板块…
As a process F 35/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: assets/echarts.min.js
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: 39. 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: assets/echarts.min.js - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "homepage"
Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: assets/echarts.min.js
- 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. 21 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2107 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- low 13 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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 462: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 14 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 21 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.