CD humanize-ai-text
学术写作风格工具箱（中英双语，academic writing style toolkit）：论文降AI率、去AI味的风格自查与自然化改写工具（style naturalization & style-pattern scan）。 写作风格特征自查报告、确定性文本清理（各家模型残留、标点、填充短语）、完整性 守卫（数字/DOI/PMID/术语必须原样保留）、以及由 agent 执行的风格自然化深改 （去模板化、去翻译腔、节奏、具体性），让正式文体更清晰自然——特别适合行文 生硬、模板腔重的作者与非母语（ESL）学者。内置 AIGC 使用披露合规检查（中国 2025-09 标识办法）与学术诚信护栏：本工具只做写作质量 自查与改进，不用于误代署名、隐瞒应披露的 AI 使用或对抗学术诚信审查。100% 本地 运行，零上传，仅 Python 标准库。家族：paper-polisher-pro（综合润色）、pubmed-verifier、 cite-holmes、academic-figures、cn-med-oa、doc-holmes。
学术写作风格工具箱（中英双语，academic writing style toolkit）：论文降AI率、去AI味的风格自查与自然化改写工具（style naturalization & style-pattern scan）。 写作风格特征自查报告、确定性文本清理（各家模型残留、标点、填充短语）、完整性…
As a process D 35/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: scripts/…, scripts/patterns_*.json
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 asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Read Write Bash Glob Grep
Files scanned: 22. 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: scripts/… - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/patterns_*.json
Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100
- 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/…, scripts/patterns_*.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. 35 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1415 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
- -32 of 9 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 471: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 35 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (8 of 8)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 65.