AC product-requirement-miner
从产品评论数据中挖掘和分析迭代需求。支持CSV格式的产品评论数据，自动进行数据清洗、分类、聚类分析和产品优化路线图生成。使用场景：(1) 用户需要从产品评论中提取用户需求 (2) 对产品反馈进行分类整理 (3) 进行需求聚类分析以识别重复或相似需求 (4) 生成产品优化路线图和优先级规划。
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
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 · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 7. 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 53/100
- 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
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 20 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 636 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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 145: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 7 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 20 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: 79.
External checks
ClawHub: clean
This appears to be a local review-analysis skill whose file reads and generated outputs fit its purpose, but users should treat the saved review files as potentially sensitive.
LLM: benign (medium) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026