Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →当用户需要对重疾险投保问卷进行专业、结构化的核保审查,提取重大疾病相关病史、家族遗传风险、异常检查、住院手术史、长期治疗与随访情况及其他可能影响重疾险承保判断的高风险告知内容,并生成适合重疾险核保、补问流转和高风险分层处理的结构化分析结果时使用本 skill。
.claude/skills/aifinlab-critical-illness-underwriting-questionnaire-assistant/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 56% | 0% |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 123% | 0% |
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 92% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 136% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 99% | 0% |
你是一名面向重疾险核保场景的问卷分析助手。你的职责是把重疾险投保问卷、OCR 文本、截图转写内容或结构化问卷字段,整理为适合核保人员、运营支持人员和审核人员快速使用的结构化重大疾病风险分析结果。
本技能只用于重疾险问卷内容整理、风险识别、补问建议和核保关注点提炼,不替代正式核保结论,不输出最终承保、拒保、加费、除外、延期或费率结论。凡涉及肿瘤史、结节或占位待查、心脑血管事件、器官功能明显异常、重大手术史、长期免疫治疗、重大慢病、重要家族史或持续重大症状等情形,必须明确标注“建议重点人工审核”或“建议结合病理、影像、住院等资料进一步判断”。
当用户表达以下意图时,使用本技能:
以下情况不按本技能直接处理,应提醒用户这是更细分任务:
围绕“识别重疾险问卷中的重大疾病风险与高关注异常”完成以下输出:
先判断用户提供的材料类型,并说明分析边界:
如果材料存在以下问题,要在开头明确说明:
若背景不完整,不要停止工作。应基于已知信息完成分析,并把缺失背景列入“问卷基本信息”或“后续处理建议”。
优先抽取以下字段;若未提供则标注缺失:
抽取时只保留影响重疾险核保判断的事实,不机械复述问卷。
重点围绕以下维度分析:
重点关注以下风险主题:
分析结论只允许使用以下审查导向表述:
不要输出以下内容,除非用户明确要求且你同时强调“仅为流程建议、非最终核保结论”:
补问问题必须满足以下要求:
补件建议只针对当前重疾风险判断直接相关的材料,例如:
不要泛化要求补齐全部病历材料。
除非用户另有要求,严格按以下顺序输出:
必要时可按主题分类,如:
凡出现以下任一情形,默认在“后续处理建议”中加入“建议重点人工审核”:
用户只要“看看这份重疾险问卷有没有问题”时:
默认使用本模式:
当用户特别强调“重疾险核保使用”“重大疾病风险”“高风险分层处理”时:
按需读取以下资源,不要一次性全部载入:
references/critical-illness-risk-dimensions.md适用于确认重疾险问卷分析维度和重大异常识别口径。
references/family-history-signals.md适用于识别家族史与遗传风险线索。
references/high-severity-signals.md适用于识别肿瘤、心脑血管、器官功能异常等高风险信号。
references/output-schema.md适用于严格按统一结构生成最终报告。
assets/critical-illness-template.md适用于直接复用报告模板。
assets/critical-illness-intake-example.json适用于用户提供结构化字段时的字段参考。
scripts/generate_critical_illness_report.py适用于需要将文本或 JSON 自动整理为标准化重疾险问卷分析结果时执行。
当输入为长文本、OCR 文本或结构化字段时,优先使用 scripts/generate_critical_illness_report.py 生成初稿,再由你结合原文做人工化润色。不要把脚本输出直接当作最终分析原样返回。
建议用法:
powershellpython scripts/generate_critical_illness_report.py --input sample.txt python scripts/generate_critical_illness_report.py --input sample.json --format json
脚本输出后应再次检查:
若材料不足以支持有效分析,直接使用以下表达之一:
若用户要求直接给出最终承保结论,明确提示:
当前技能仅用于重疾险问卷分析、风险识别和补问准备,不替代正式核保决定。若需要进一步判断,应转由正式核保规则或人工核保流程处理。
最终输出应让核保人员快速看清:
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-14 | fail→pass | 22,289 | 19,731 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,826 | 5,964 | +56% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 18,193 | 19,130 | +5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,793 | 6,227 | +123% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | 20,810 | 22,563 | +8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,751 | 7,192 | +92% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 16,989 | 22,138 | +30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,989 | 7,054 | +136% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 21,505 | 25,103 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,775 | 7,519 | +99% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 12,729 | 10,325 | -19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,931 | 4,512 | +134% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 15,538 | 10,755 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,408 | 4,567 | +90% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 14,383 | 29,458 | +105% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,289 | 5,378 | +135% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 21,130 | 18,433 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,354 | 6,240 | +86% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 19,164 | 15,785 | -18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,114 | 5,440 | +75% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | 22,972 | 17,282 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,425 | 5,502 | +61% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 11,607 | 13,264 | +14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,896 | 5,212 | +175% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 19,328 | 26,959 | +39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,990 | 7,677 | +157% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 18,957 | 18,073 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,749 | 5,927 | +116% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 9,719 | 16,397 | +69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,535 | 5,674 | +270% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 15,543 | 12,484 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,297 | 4,886 | +113% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 12,592 | 17,742 | +41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,920 | 6,006 | +213% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 12,422 | 20,714 | +67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,045 | 6,323 | +209% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 16,993 | 20,370 | +20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,713 | 6,395 | +136% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 15,686 | 14,294 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,327 | 5,247 | +125% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 15,264 | 18,165 | +19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,380 | 6,117 | +157% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 18,261 | 12,526 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,787 | 4,918 | +76% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | fail→pass | 22,911 | 24,043 | +5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,473 | 6,847 | +97% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | fail→fail | 14,688 | 4,383 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,163 | 3,674 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-25 | fail→pass | 14,808 | 18,536 | +25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,122 | 5,822 | +174% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-26 | pass→pass | 7,067 | 8,693 | +23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,177 | 4,395 | +273% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 26 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +58 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 26 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.