CC paper-poster-html
DEFAULT poster pipeline — build an academic conference poster (ICML/NeurIPS/ICLR/CVPR/...) as a single HTML/CSS file with measurement-driven hard gates, real paper figures, a two-hue design-token system, and print-ready PDF via headless Chromium. Use when the user says "做海报", "poster", "conference poster", "paper poster", or asks to design/redo a research poster. Supersedes the retired LaTeX /paper-poster.
DEFAULT poster pipeline — build an academic conference poster (ICML/NeurIPS/ICLR/CVPR/...) as a single HTML/CSS file with measurement-driven hard gates, real…
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — References files that are not bundled: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md, references/good/, references/bad/
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
- 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: Bash(*)allowed-tools: Bash(*) Read Write Edit Grep Glob WebFetch WebSearch AskUserQuestion mcp__codex__codex mcp__antigravity__antigravity mcp__antigravity__antigravity-reply mcp__grok__grok mcp__grok__grok-
Files scanned: 31. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/good/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/bad/
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Tools and files. 3 referenced file(s) missing: ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md, references/good/, references/bad/
- 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4538 tokens
- 100Steps. 34 steps
- 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
- -32 of 7 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 409: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 34 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (6 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.