Content
82%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A concise, well-structured refactoring skill that points Claude to exact files, phases, and a runnable test block. Adding an explicit validation/retry loop around the refactor workflow and tightening a few navigation hints into concrete steps would raise it further.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validate→fix→re-run feedback loop (e.g. run the pytest/npm block, read failures, fix, re-run) so destructive refactor work has a checkpoint rather than just a final test list.
Convert a couple of 'see these files' navigation pointers into one concrete example (e.g. a minimal build_request()/apply_decision() snippet) to lift actionability.
Note which referenced spec docs are authoritative vs. informational so Claude knows where to stop when they conflict.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean bullet/checklist format that assumes Claude's knowledge of the codebase; no padding or re-explanation of concepts, every line carries actionable signal. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete file paths (e.g. 'src/server/runtime/session.py') and executable commands (pytest/npm blocks), but much of the guidance is 'look at these files' navigation rather than copy-paste runnable steps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequenced workflow ('先看锚点文档 → 再看当前落点 → 判断改动层级') plus per-phase checklists and a runnable test block; however there is no explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop for the destructive/refactor operations it covers. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with clearly signaled one-level-deep path references to spec docs and entry points; no nesting. No bundle files exist, so the skill is appropriately a self-contained overview pointing into repo files. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |