Content
81%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 well-engineered orchestration skill: the state machine, checkpoints, attempt caps, and completion gates are unambiguous, and detail is properly delegated to clearly signaled one-level references. The main deductions are duplicated cost/attempt logic that inflates token cost, a vague TAPD status-update instruction, and two §11 reference entries that point to files not present in the bundle.
Suggestions
Deduplicate the cost-reconciliation logic: keep the full procedure in §5 step 5a and reduce §9's paragraph to a one-line pointer ('best-effort 记账，见 §5 5a；对账门禁见 tapd-story-commit'), and similarly fold the §7 'Attempt 上限' repetition into a pointer to §5.
Make the TAPD status update concrete by naming the exact MCP tool and parameters (as done for stories_get), e.g. specify the tool call used to set v_status='doing' and the status set at commit.
Fix §11 reference hygiene: remove or correct the dangling 'tapd-story-specify/references/technical-clarification-*.md' entries (or copy those files into the bundle), and add the existing 'references/report-template.md' to the table so every bundle file is discoverable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes competence — state-machine tables, exact transitions, no concept padding — but the cost-reconciliation logic is stated twice (§5 step 5a and again in §9) and the attempt-cap rule is repeated between §5 step 2 and the §7 'Attempt 上限' section. These are minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed to single pointers, matching the level-4 anchor rather than the lean level-5 anchor; it is clearly above the 'some unnecessary explanation' midpoint. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is mostly executable: exact meta.yaml field writes, phase transitions, MCP call parameters ('stories_get 拉取... id=${ID}、workspace_id=${WORKSPACE_ID}'), and per-stage agent assignments. However the TAPD status update is vague ('用TAPD MCP更新需求状态（v_status）为doing' names no tool), and most executable detail lives in references rather than inline — minor gaps that fit 'concrete code or commands with minor gaps' rather than fully copy-paste-ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The orchestration sequence is explicit with real validation checkpoints: startup validation of external mutations (step 3, fail as mutation_invalid), the confirm checkpoint after tasks-generated, a completion gate verifying commit.md exists, and full feedback loops (reject/retry with attempts < max_attempts=3 cap, blocked → questions.md). Checklists (§4 field quick-reference, §7 orchestration table) are present, matching the level-5 anchor exactly. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The SKILL.md is an orchestration overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep references (§11 table with per-file purpose, section-level pointers like '见 references/state-mutation-guide.md §7'), and all core reference files exist in the bundle. Two gaps keep it from 5: §11 lists 'tapd-story-specify/references/technical-clarification-guide.md' and '-template.md' which are absent from this bundle (dangling paths), and 'references/report-template.md' exists on disk but is not listed in §11. Still comfortably above the 'some structure, references not clearly signaled' midpoint. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |