Conciseness

Dense, directive controller prose that assumes Claude's intelligence and avoids explaining basic concepts; every section is operational. Not a 5 only because the 550-line body, while justified by 3 modes and 10 stages, has minor repetition across mode pipelines and payload templates that could be tightened.

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready payload contracts with exact field names, absolute path templates, concrete bash commands (e.g., the progress_event.py and launch_workbench.py invocations), and explicit output file targets covering the common per-stage cases.

Workflow Clarity

Three mode pipelines are explicitly sequenced with per-stage validation gates (validation_ok:true, validator scripts), and §4.4 gives a complete failure/retry table with routing, retry limits, and feedback loops for evidence, planning, and stitching — a textbook validate→fix→retry loop for a batch research operation.

Progressive Disclosure

Clear §1→§6 reading map with one-level-deep references to role files, schemas, and validator scripts; the referenced validator scripts exist in ./scripts/. Not a 5 because the role .md and schema .md files referenced in payloads are not present in the provided bundle, so the split is signaled but not fully verifiable.

Specificity

Lists several specific trigger scenarios (深度研究、系统性研究、竞品分析、方案对比、趋势分析、事实核查) plus four explicit numbered trigger conditions and concrete exclusions, but the core 'what' (multi-agent research orchestration) is implied rather than enumerated as concrete actions.

Completeness

Has an exceptionally explicit and thorough 'when' (trigger words, four conditions, and exclusions) but the 'what' is only weakly implied via the trigger context rather than stating the orchestration capability directly; not a 5 because 'what' lacks a concrete capability statement.

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive coverage of natural terms including Chinese synonyms (研究/调研/调查/尽调/行业研究), scenario phrases, and English equivalents (research/deep research) that users would naturally say.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (deep multi-source research requiring cross-verification) with explicit exclusions (简单常识问答不使用, 一句话摘要, 纯文字润色) that sharply minimize conflict with general Q&A or summarization skills.