technical-clarity
審查技術內容的清晰度
技術內容常包含隱藏障礙,如排他性語言、未定義的術語和不匹配的閱讀級別。此技能透過推理視角系統性地審查內容,在學習者遇到問題之前識別可及性問題。
下载技能 ZIP
在 Claude 中上传
前往 设置 → 功能 → 技能 → 上传技能
开启并开始使用
测试它
正在使用“technical-clarity”。 Review this decorator explanation for B1 (intermediate) learners: 'Obviously, decorators are simple. Just wrap your function and you are done.'
预期结果:
- Clarity Score: 1.5/5 (Needs Significant Improvement)
- CRITICAL: Gatekeeping language detected (3 violations: 'Obviously,' 'simple,' 'Just')
- CRITICAL: Core terms undefined ('decorator' and 'wrap' never defined)
- IMPORTANT: Missing context - prerequisites not stated, no motivation given
- Enhancement: Add concrete usage example before abstract explanation
正在使用“technical-clarity”。 Audit this documentation section for A2 (beginner) learners. Check for accessibility, reading level, and jargon.
预期结果:
- Accessibility Score: 3/5 (Partially Accessible)
- Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 10 (target: 6-8 for A2)
- Issues: 5 undefined terms per paragraph (limit: 2-3)
- Recommendations: Break sentences over 25 words, replace complex terms, add visual descriptions for screen readers
安全审计
安全Pure prompt-based documentation skill containing only accessibility review guidelines. No executable code, network calls, file system access, or external commands. All static findings are false positives triggered by markdown code examples and metadata fields.
风险因素
🌐 网络访问 (1)
📁 文件系统访问 (1)
⚙️ 外部命令 (39)
质量评分
你能构建什么
文件審查
在發布前審查 API 文件、教學和參考資料的學習者可及性
教育內容稽核
驗證教學內容是否符合預期難度層級和閱讀級別
清晰度評估
識別並標記不清楚的段落、缺失的定義和理解障礙
试试这些提示
Review this [paragraph/section] for technical clarity. Target audience: [A2/B1/B2+] learners. Flag any gatekeeping language, undefined jargon, or accessibility issues.
Perform a complete technical clarity audit on this [document/chapter]. Follow the 5-question framework: Audience Context, Readability Gap, Jargon Necessity, Completeness, Accessibility. Provide a score and specific revision suggestions.
Analyze this content for undefined technical terms. List each undefined term, where it appears, and a suggested definition appropriate for [A2/B1/B2+] learners.
Scan this content for gatekeeping language (obviously, simply, just, of course, trivially, everyone knows). List each occurrence with replacement suggestions that explain rather than minimize.
最佳实践
- 在審查前始終指定目標熟練度級別(A2/B1/B2+)
- 系統性地應用全部 5 個問題集以進行完整分析
- 區分必要術語(領域特定)和不必要術語
避免
- 接受 'obviously' 或 'simply' 作為可接受的澄清語言
- 跳過程式碼範例和格式的可及性驗證
- 假設 B2+ 學習者不需要任何腳手架或定義