SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB cn-fupan

Run a 复盘 (fupan), the structured project review widely used in Chinese companies: review the goal, assess the result, analyse why, and draw rules for next time, with a blame-free tone and owned actions. Use when asked 帮我做复盘, 项目复盘, 活动复盘, 复盘会怎么开, or a fupan or retrospective in Chinese. Produces the 复盘 document in Chinese with goal versus result, root causes split into controllable and uncontrollable, lessons stated as reusable rules, and an action list with owners and dates, plus a meeting agenda.

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills Agent Skills author: mohitagw15856 MIT 1 file body ≈ 775 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 3 h ago

Run a 复盘 (fupan), the structured project review widely used in Chinese companies: review the goal, assess the result, analyse why, and draw rules for next…

As a process B 70/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers, failures and branches, progress reporting

AnalyzerLearningOperations and projectstype 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
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
87
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
70/100
Nearly there
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: cn-fupan (mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills)

How to improve

    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: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 70/100

    • 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
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 34 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 775 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)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 500: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 9 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 34 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (0 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.