Content
63%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 a well-organized, actionable instruction skill with a clear multi-step method and a concrete output template. Its weaknesses are mild verbosity from repeated epigraphs and a missing referenced file that breaks progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Provide the missing original-texts.md (or remove the "详细原著依据见 original-texts.md" reference) so the signaled deep reference resolves.
Add one fully worked example showing a complete filled-in 矛盾分析表 to lift actionability to 5.
Trim the per-step 《矛盾论》 epigraphs to one-line attributions and consolidate "何时使用" with "不适用场景" to improve conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient and avoids explaining basic concepts Claude already knows, but the repeated full 《矛盾论》 epigraphs under each step and the dual "何时使用" / "不适用场景" sections could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The 操作规程 gives concrete, executable output tokens ("[A] vs [B]", "⭐ 主要矛盾", "对抗性"/"非对抗性", "接下来我将……", "⚠️ 需监控:…") with clear decision criteria; the gap is the absence of a full end-to-end worked example. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear six-step sequence (第一步–第六步) plus a five-item required-output checklist and a step-6 monitoring feedback loop; it is not a hard validate→fix→retry gate, so it stops short of 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-sectioned and signals a one-level-deep reference ("详细原著依据见 original-texts.md"), but that referenced file is absent from the bundle, leaving a dangling reference. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |