Content
65%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 content is dense, actionable, and well-structured with code, formulas, and an A-share calendar, but it lacks validation checkpoints in its batch portfolio workflow and keeps all detail inline with no progressive disclosure to reference files.
Suggestions
Add explicit validation checkpoints to the 4-step workflow (e.g., verify SUE std is computed from ≥8 quarters, confirm non-recurring items are excluded, sanity-check consensus coverage ≥3 analysts before signaling).
Split the five core concepts (Top-Down, Bottom-Up, SUE, PEAD, analyst-revision momentum) and the output template into reference files under references/ and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview that links to them one level deep.
Provide at least one end-to-end runnable example (data fetch → SUE calc → signal → backtest stats) instead of only illustrative snippets to push actionability to 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is information-dense — formulas, thresholds, code, tables, and an A-share earnings calendar — with little padding; only minor sections (the 概述 restating the core logic, brief concept intros) could be trimmed, so it sits above the midpoint but short of fully lean. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete Python snippets (SUE, ERM, revenue decomposition), explicit thresholds (SUE>1.5, ERM>0.3), a portfolio config dict, and a fill-in output template give mostly executable guidance; gaps remain because the code is illustrative/formulaic rather than end-to-end runnable scripts with data fetching. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 盈利分析四步法 gives a clear 4-step sequence (构建预测→获取一致预期→计算偏差→信号生成), but portfolio construction involves batch operations (max_positions, rebalance) with no validation/verification checkpoints, so workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the rubric. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single ~200-line file is well-organized with clear section headers, but no bundle/reference files exist and content that could be split (each of the 5 core concepts, the output template) is fully inlined, so it reads as detailed materials rather than an overview pointing to one-level-deep references. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |