SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

CD read-docx-review

读取 Word/WPS 审阅后的 docx，把批注（comments）与修订（track changes）提取成可逐条裁决的 markdown 对账表或 JSON。触发场景：对方批注完的合同/协议/书稿/报告回来了要读意见；「提取 docx 批注」「审阅意见对账」「读一下修订」「谁批了什么、批在哪」；WPS 云文档/Word 在线协作 导出的审阅稿；收到带修订模式改动的回稿要看对方改了什么；已有明确基线，要核对无批注、 无修订稿的全文改动。修订感知——python-docx 裸读会漏掉修订插入（w:ins）的内容、认不出整段删除（w:del），本 skill 走 OpenXML SDK 引擎 读取已支持的批注、段落增删与文本视图；范围见正文。只读，不改对方文件。 边界：生成/排版 docx → docx-creator 或 minimax-docx；PDF 批注不在范围。

daymade/claude-code-skills Claude Code author: daymade MIT 8 files · 5 scripts body ≈ 1 027 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

读取 Word/WPS 审阅后的 docx，把批注（comments）与修订（track changes）提取成可逐条裁决的 markdown 对账表或 JSON。触发场景：对方批注完的合同/协议/书稿/报告回来了要读意见；「提取 docx 批注」「审阅意见对账」「读一下修订」「谁批了什么、批在哪」；WPS…

As a process D 40/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: scripts/csharp/tasks/, scripts/…

AnalyzerWordSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
C
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
70
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
40/100
Unfinished process
References files that are not bundled: scripts/csharp/tasks/, scripts/…
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
  2. 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 · 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-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: scripts/csharp/tasks/
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: scripts/…

Process rating: all ten parameters 40/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: scripts/csharp/tasks/, scripts/…
  • 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/csharp/tasks/, scripts/…
  • 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
  • 100Steps. 6 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1027 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 391: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 8 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 6 items
  • +4Has examples (6 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
  • +3All 2 scripts are documented

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 70.