Content
88%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.
A concise, well-structured strategy skill with a clear sequenced workflow and explicit validation checkpoints. The two weakest points are actionability (blank template, no worked example) and progressive disclosure (a dead reference to a missing original-texts.md file).
Suggestions
Add one worked example that fills in the 输出模板 for a representative scenario (e.g., a from-scratch MVP) so the guidance covers a common case end-to-end and lifts actionability toward 5.
Provide the missing original-texts.md bundle file under ./references/ — or, if no source-text appendix is intended, remove the dead "原著依据:[original-texts.md]" link so navigation is not broken.
Make the failure-recovery path of the 流寇主义检查 explicit (e.g., 'if a checkbox fails, do not expand; return to 扎根 or adjust the base') to convert the implicit gating into a spelled-out feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence — no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; the opening aphorism and metaphorical parentheticals are brief and load-bearing for a mnemonic strategy skill, so every section earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, applicable guidance — a 5-step 操作规程, a four-element base-selection criterion, a 3-item 流寇主义检查 checklist, and a fill-in 输出模板 with specific fields; not 5 because the template is blank rather than a worked example covering a common case. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 5-step sequence with explicit validation: step 1 gates on conditions ("条件不足 → 先 investigation-first"), step 4 is a required pre-expansion checklist ("每次扩展前必须通过"), and step 5 enforces sequential gating ("前一步稳固后才走下一步"), matching the anchor for explicit validation steps plus checklists. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clear sections (用/不用, 操作规程, 输出模板, 纪律, 交接) with a clearly signaled one-level reference ("原著依据:[original-texts.md]"), but that referenced file does not exist in the bundle, so navigation is not clean — a minor gap rather than a fully navigable structure. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |