Content
60%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 well-structured domain-layer skill with an explicit routed workflow, per-gate validation and failure returns, and properly delegated reference files. Its main weaknesses are redundancy in the governance rules and a lack of concrete templates or examples that would make the heavy process directly executable.
Suggestions
Add a minimal worked example of the contract and one gate record (e.g., a filled-in type-route-contract with route, build_hash, authority owners, and excluded_claims) so the required field lists translate into a concrete artifact.
Deduplicate the authority-transfer/derived-output and claim-ceiling rules: state them once in §2/§5 and have gates reference them instead of restating them.
Cross-link each route or gate to the corresponding section in references/patterns.md so readers can navigate from the inline policy to the detailed patterns in one step.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The 125-line body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows and is information-dense, but authority-transfer, derived-output, and claim-ceiling rules are restated across §2, the individual gates, and §5, and the specimen-decoration paragraph duplicates reference-level guidance, so it could be tightened meaningfully. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete at the policy level — named contract fields (build_hash, excluded_claims), a fixed list of authority concerns, an explicit selection recording chain, and eight enumerated gates with inputs and evidence — but there are no worked examples, contract/gate record templates, or executable commands, so execution requires substantial interpretation. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear ordered sequence (lock route → write contract/authority graph → tool selection → eight gates in order → claim ceiling → stop/handoff) where every gate specifies 晋升证据 and an explicit 失败返回 target, and '第一个失败的 required gate 决定返回位置' defines checkpoint precedence; minor gaps remain because re-validation mechanics and the shared gate schema live in the external base skill. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Two real, one-level-deep references (references/patterns.md, references/tool-profiles.md) are clearly signaled with purpose ('按需读取 [领域模式与检查]… [专业工具能力档案]') and the split is sensible (routing/gating policy inline, patterns and tool profiles external), but the body itself carries heavy per-gate detail and does not cross-map sections to specific parts of the reference files. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |