Content
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-organized, highly actionable instruction skill whose template tables and format rules give Claude concrete structural guidance, weakened only by dot-graph/prose redundancy, the absence of an explicit validation checkpoint, and a monolithic single-file layout with no progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Remove the redundancy between the dot decision-graph and the "领域专属触发条件" / "复合意图处理" bullets — keep one representation.
Add an explicit final validation step (e.g. "Before finishing, verify every 必须 section is present and every conclusion is tagged with a certainty level") to turn 执行纪律 into a true checkpoint.
Consider moving the four domain-specific templates (学术/医疗/法律/政策) into reference files linked from the body to improve progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and table-driven with no re-explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but the dot decision-graph largely duplicates the adjacent "领域专属触发条件" / "复合意图处理" prose, so it could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, directly usable guidance: per-template chapter tables with 必须/可选 markers, hard format requirements ("对比矩阵…必须有", evidence grading A/B/C, IRAC), and explicit 必须/禁止 rules — fully actionable for an instruction-only skill. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The selection flow is clearly sequenced via the decision tree and reinforced by a 必须/禁止 checklist, but there is no explicit validation checkpoint or fix→retry feedback loop embedded in the workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-sectioned internally (clear ## headers and tables, not a wall of text), but it is a single ~250-line file with no external references, and the four domain-specific templates are content that could plausibly be split into reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |