Content
50%Reviews 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 methodology skill with a clear sequencing of steps and a concrete operating protocol, but it is padded with repeated quotations, lacks validation checkpoints, and references a bundle file (original-texts.md) that is not present.
Suggestions
Trim the redundant Mao quotations and repeated 'investigate-before-concluding' restatements so each token earns its place and conciseness improves.
Add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint to the 操作规程 (e.g., 'confirm every checklist item is answered and every assumption is backed by a first-hand fact before writing the conclusion').
Either supply the referenced original-texts.md or remove the dangling '详细原著依据见 original-texts.md' pointer so progressive disclosure is consistent.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient conceptual guidance rather than padding Claude's knowledge, but it is noticeably extended by repeated Mao quotations and restatements of the same 'investigate before concluding' principle, matching the 'Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It mixes a concrete 操作规程 (named steps, checkbox checklist, fixed output template) with abstract methodological prose in the six-step flow, so guidance is present and useful but not uniformly concrete or copy-paste ready, matching the 'Some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The six-step process and 七项注意 are clearly sequenced and the 操作规程 enforces an explicit ordering constraint ('调查结论必须先于任何行动方案出现'), but there is no validation/verification checkpoint (e.g., how to confirm the investigation is actually sufficient) and the steps lack explicit error-recovery feedback, matching the 'Steps listed but validation gaps' anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well sectioned and keeps a single inline pointer ('详细原著依据见 original-texts.md'), but no bundle directories exist and that referenced file is missing, so the reference is unverified and navigation is only loosely signaled, matching the 'Some structure but could be better organized; references present but not clearly signaled' anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |