Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with a clear, well-validated workflow, but loses points on conciseness from repeated blocks and on progressive disclosure for not leveraging the provided reference files.
Suggestions
Dedupe the recurring MCP-availability warning and the "关键约束" list into a single canonical section and reference it, removing the verbatim repeats in 模式选择, Phase 3, 注意事项, and the 概念图遍历 section.
Link the existing references/api-reference.md and references/requirement-builder.md from the body (e.g., a Phase 2 or Phase 3 pointer) instead of inlining their API/request detail, so the overview stays lean.
Consolidate the standalone "概念图遍历 → 批量微课堂" section with Phase 1.2, since they describe the same flow, to avoid duplicated guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Per-section guidance is efficient, but the body repeats blocks verbatim (the "关键约束" list appears twice and the MCP-availability warning recurs ~5 times) that could be tightened into a single canonical statement. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable script invocations with complete input JSON, concrete API request bodies, and exact health-check and polling commands — copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Five sequenced phases with explicit validation checkpoints and a resumable manifest for the batch case; status branching at each poll step gives clear feedback loops. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Two real reference docs (api-reference.md, requirement-builder.md) exist in the bundle but are never linked from the body, while API-reference detail is inlined; structure exists but the references are unsignaled and content that should be separate remains inline. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |