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.
The body delivers genuinely actionable communication guidance — templates, bad/better contrasts, and a final checklist — with a clear numbered workflow and well-signaled one-level-deep references. Its two real defects are redundancy (the clarification, roadmark, and template guidance is each repeated 2-4 times across sections) and a dangling reference to a non-existent 'examples/' directory.
Suggestions
Deduplicate: keep the clarification policy in one section (e.g. 'Clarification And Question Policy') and reduce the Default Workflow, Communication Defaults, and Core Rule 6 restatements to single-line pointers; do the same for the duplicated roadmark list (Rule 7 vs 'Long-Running Work') and the output templates (Default Workflow vs 'Common Output Shapes') — this alone would cut roughly a quarter of the body.
Create the 'examples/' directory with 2-3 short worked responses (one substantial report, one quick answer, one decision) or remove the 'examples/' line from 'Load When Needed' — as written it points to a bundle path that does not exist.
Make the response-format selection explicit in the workflow (e.g. 'if the answer needs more than ~5 lines, use the substantial template; otherwise the quick template') so the checkpoint between formats is not left to judgment.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The same guidance is restated multiple times: the ask-questions policy appears in 'Default Workflow' steps 1-2, the entire 'Clarification And Question Policy' section, a 'Communication Defaults' bullet, and Core Rule 6; the roadmark list appears verbatim in Rule 7 and the 'Long-Running Work' scenario; and the output templates appear in both 'Default Workflow' and 'Common Output Shapes'. This is noticeably verbose — several padded sections that a pass of deduplication could remove — though each individual sentence is lean and no space is spent teaching concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | The body is highly concrete for an instruction-only skill: copy-paste-ready output templates, bad/better example pairs ('结构比较清晰' vs '这个输出文件有 36 个二级章节、5358 行'), a P0/P1/P2 ranking scheme, a concrete vague-phrase blacklist, and a final checklist. It falls short of 5 because the promised 'examples/' directory of short response examples does not exist in the bundle, so the worked examples that would fully ground the guidance are missing. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Default Workflow' is a clear 7-step numbered sequence, and the 'Final answer checklist' provides an explicit end-of-task validation checkpoint, with clarification rounds acting as a feedback loop for ambiguous requests. It does not reach 5 because the checklist lacks a recovery loop (what to revise when a check fails) and some checkpoints are implicit — e.g. when to switch between the substantial/quick/decision response formats is left to judgment. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The 'Load When Needed' section cleanly signals two one-level-deep references with one-line descriptions, and both referenced files (references/communication-sop.md, references/user-preferences.md) exist in the bundle. The main gap is the dangling 'examples/' entry, which points to a directory that does not exist, plus a moderate amount of detail (the full template catalog and scenario rules) inlined in SKILL.md that could live in the references. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |