Content
100%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 body is exemplary: terse, behavior-only prose with concrete Bad/Good contrasts, an explicit pre-send checklist, and clean section organization. Nothing is padded, nothing is missing for its single purpose, and it assumes Claude's competence throughout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every line prescribes behavior ("One term per thing", "Flavor character? Cut.") with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — the body even warns against over-claiming savings ("Token savings are small and noisy; never claim them"). Clearly the 5 anchor: lean, assumes competence, every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete Bad/Good example pairs for each rule (e.g., "Bad: '以記憶化鉤子包之。' Good: '以 `useMemo` 包之。'") plus an explicit particle inventory (之, 乃, 為, 其, 則, 故, 以) make the style guidance directly executable. For an instruction-only skill, guidance is fully concrete and covers the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A single-purpose per-response behavior that is unambiguous, with an explicit validation checklist ("Pre-send check: Identifiers verbatim, original script? Negations present? Two readings? 白話.") and enumerated break-the-rules conditions (security warning, irreversible action, ambiguity, user confusion). The simple-skill exception applies and no destructive/batch operations require further loops. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Roughly 40 lines of well-organized sections (Persistence, Floor, Rules, When to break the rules, Pre-send check) with no external references needed and none dangling — the under-50-lines simple-skill case where well-organized sections alone merit a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 20 / 20 Passed |