Awesome-omni-skills keyword-extractor-v2
Keyword Extractor workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs > and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
git clone https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/keyword-extractor-v2" ~/.claude/skills/diegosouzapw-awesome-omni-skills-keyword-extractor-v2 && rm -rf "$T"
skills/keyword-extractor-v2/SKILL.mdKeyword Extractor
Overview
This public intake copy packages
plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills/skills/keyword-extractor from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses
metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
Keyword Extractor Extracts max 50 relevant keywords from text and formats them in a strict machine-ready structure. ---
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Limitations.
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
- Extracting keywords or tags for any given text or paragraph
- Creating comma-separated keywords or tags suitable for SEO, search, or metadata
- Generating topic-specific keywords or tags based on the content’s main subjects and concepts
- Summaries or paraphrasing requests
- Text analysis without keyword generation
- SEO and search
Operating Table
| Situation | Start here | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| First-time use | | Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path before touching the copied workflow |
| Provenance review | | Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source |
| Workflow execution | | Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution |
| Supporting context | | Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package |
| Handoff decision | | Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts |
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
- main subject
- key topics
- domain terminology
- entities
- concepts
- core topics
- related concepts
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: Step 1 — Analyze
Identify:
- main subject
- key topics
- domain terminology
- entities
- concepts
Ignore filler words.
Imported: Step 2 — Generate Keywords
Generate up to 50 strictly SEO-friendly keywords directly from the text.
Include:
- core topics
- domain terminology
- related concepts
- common search queries
Allowed formats:
- single words
- 2 word phrases
- 3 word phrases
- 4 word phrases
Example:
machine learning, neural networks, deep learning models, ai algorithms, data science tools
Avoid vague keywords, filler phrases, adjectives without nouns like:
important methods, different ideas, various techniques, things
Keywords must not exceed 4 words.
Imported: Step 3 — Rank
Order keywords by SEO importance using these signals:
- main topic of the text
- high-value domain terminology
- technologies, tools, or entities mentioned
- common search queries related to the topic
- supporting contextual topics
Most important keywords should always appear first.
Imported: Step 4 — Normalize
Ensure:
- lowercase, comma separated, no duplicates
- ≤50 keywords
- Remove near-duplicate keywords that represent the same concept.
- Keep only the most common search phrase.
- If two keywords represent the same concept, keep only the more common search phrase.
Imported: Step 5 — Validate
Before returning output ensure:
- keyword_count <= 50
- no duplicates and near-duplicates
- all lowercase and comma separated
- no trailing period
- each keyword is a clear searchable topic
- keywords do not exceed 4 words
If any rule fails regenerate the list.
FAILURE HANDLING
If text is very short, infer likely topics and still generate keywords. Never exceed 50 keywords.
Imported: Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.
Examples
Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
Use @keyword-extractor-v2 to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
Review @keyword-extractor-v2 against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
Use @keyword-extractor-v2 for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
Review @keyword-extractor-v2 using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
Imported Usage Notes
Imported: QUICK START
Jump to any section:
- CORE MANDATE – Output rules and formatting
- WHEN TO USE – Trigger conditions for this skill
- KEYWORD QUALITY RULES – Priorities and forbidden keywords
- WORKFLOW – Step-by-step generation and processing
- FAILURE HANDLING – Short text or edge cases
CORE MANDATE
Return exactly one comma-separated line of keywords, following these rules:
- max 50 keywords
- ordered by relevance
- all lowercase
- no duplicates or near-duplicates
- mix of single words and 2–4 word phrases
- no numbering, bullets, explanations, or trailing period
Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
- Keep the imported skill grounded in the upstream repository; do not invent steps that the source material cannot support.
- Prefer the smallest useful set of support files so the workflow stays auditable and fast to review.
- Keep provenance, source commit, and imported file paths visible in notes and PR descriptions.
- Point directly at the copied upstream files that justify the workflow instead of relying on generic review boilerplate.
- Treat generated examples as scaffolding; adapt them to the concrete task before execution.
- Route to a stronger native skill when architecture, debugging, design, or security concerns become dominant.
Troubleshooting
Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in
plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills/skills/keyword-extractor, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Load only the files that materially change the answer, then restate the provenance before continuing.
Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated
SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better. Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
Related Skills
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@base-v2
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@calc-v2
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@draw-v2
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@impress-v2
Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
| Resource family | What it gives the reviewer | Example path |
|---|---|---|
| copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream | |
| worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream | |
| upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation | |
| routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package | |
| supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package | |