Content
65%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 compact, well-organized overview that excels at token efficiency and structure: clear scope/non-scope sections, crisp architectural rules, and cleanly signaled cross-skill navigation. Its weakness is executability — the pivotal 服务归属判断 step has no method or criteria, and the layering guidance lacks any code or package-layout example, so the reader knows the boundaries but not the procedure. Workflow sequencing exists but is high-level with no checkpoints.
Suggestions
Add a concrete decision method for 服务归属判断 (the skill's own first step): a short checklist or mapping table of feature domains to BK-CI services, with one worked example, so the reader can actually execute it.
Include a minimal executable example of the expected layering — e.g., a package layout (resource/service/dao) or a skeleton Resource + Service + DAO class pair for one endpoint — to make the API/Service/DAO boundary concrete.
Tighten 快速指导 into an explicit numbered workflow with checkpoints, e.g., "1) 判定服务归属（列出判断依据） 2) 定义 API 契约 3) 实现分层 4) 自查：是否有跨服务直接查库" so validation is not left implicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — short declarative rules like "服务间交互走 API 契约，不直接碰别的服务数据库" with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. It is not a 5 because a few lines are meta-commentary ("这个 skill 关注的是...不是单纯 Spring Boot 入门") or rationale ("功能落位比代码实现本身更容易决定后续维护成本") that could be trimmed or merged, but it is well above anchor 3's 'noticeably unnecessary explanation'. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The body provides some concrete guidance — the layer taxonomy (Resource/Service/DAO, "API、业务实现、启动模块和数据模型") and explicit prohibitions ("不直接碰别的服务数据库") — but the central instruction "开发前先做服务归属判断" gives no method, criteria, or example for actually making that judgment, and there is no code or package-structure example. This matches anchor 3 ('some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details') rather than 4, and is above 2 because concrete layer names and boundaries are given. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | 快速指导 provides a rough sequence — do 服务归属判断 first, then place interface/service/data layers, then respect API contracts — but the steps are loosely defined and there are no checkpoints or validation guidance (e.g., how to verify correct service ownership before proceeding). This is not a destructive or batch skill, so no cap applies; it matches anchor 3 ('steps listed but validation gaps') rather than 4, which requires most checkpoints to be present. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external bundle files (none exist for it), and is organized into clearly labeled sections (适用场景 / 不适用场景 / 快速指导 / 高信号规则 / 关键陷阱 / 延伸阅读) with well-signaled one-level-deep cross-references to sibling skills ("如果你在设计接口：再看 api-interface-design"). Per the rubric's simple-skill note, this earns the top anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |