Content
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-organized with useful dispatch tables and clear guidance, but it reads more as a methodology manifesto than an executable workflow — behavior rules are observational criteria rather than runnable steps, and there are no validation checkpoints or external reference structure.
Suggestions
Convert the '核心行为规则' table from observable-criteria descriptions into concrete, runnable steps the model can execute and verify (e.g., explicit 'attach evidence to each conclusion' action with a check).
Add an explicit decision/validation checkpoint in the dispatch flow — a concrete test for 'would this downstream skill clearly improve the result' before invoking it.
Tighten the 实事求是 section by trimming the Mao quote attribution and removing restatements of the same principle across sections to improve token efficiency.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient with well-structured tables, but sections like the full quote attribution and repeated restatements of the 实事求是 principle could be tightened without losing meaning. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The dispatch table gives concrete situation-to-skill mappings and platform-specific invocation methods (Skill tool, commands/, skills/*/SKILL.md), but the core behavior rules are observable criteria rather than executable steps a model can run verbatim. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A dispatch sequence is implied (assess 实事求是 → decide if downstream skill helps → invoke one), but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops despite routing being a decision process. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized into clear sections with no bundle files present, but the document is a single monolithic overview with no one-level-deep references to detail material. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |