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.
The body is a well-organized, token-efficient routing/policy document: it frames scope, anti-scope, principles, and pitfalls cleanly and defers to sibling skills appropriately. Its core weakness is that it prescribes conventions without documenting them — there is no code, naming example, or API-call pattern that would let Claude actually follow the project's conventions rather than just knowing they exist.
Suggestions
Add concrete examples of the project's conventions in 快速指导/高信号规则: a short sample component structure, an example API-call-and-error-handling pattern, and the actual naming/ordering rules (e.g., component file naming, prop ordering) — even a 5-10 line snippet would lift actionability.
Include a brief verification step in the workflow (e.g., 'before finishing, confirm the page handles empty/loading/error/permission states') so the sequence has an explicit checkpoint.
Move or copy the detailed convention lists into a references/ file (e.g., CONVENTIONS.md) and link it one level deep, keeping SKILL.md as the lean overview.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~40-line body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: it never explains what Vue or Vuex is, and every section (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) earns its place. This matches the anchor-5 pattern of every token earning its place; there is no padding or over-explanation to trim. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | The guidance is almost entirely abstract: "先保持组件职责单一" (keep components single-responsibility), "错误态和 loading 态必须一起设计" (design error and loading states together), "命名、缩进、组件顺序...要统一" (naming, indentation, component order must be consistent) — it mandates conventions without ever stating what those conventions ARE (no naming patterns, directory structure, example API-call form, or error-handling pattern). A few near-concrete items ("明确三件事：数据来源、交互状态、和谁通信") and the explicit sibling-skill pointers keep it above anchor 1's 'entirely vague', but the specific steps to execute are missing, which is anchor 2. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The numbered 快速指导 provides a rough orientation sequence (scope check → component design → consistency → when to defer to api-interface-design / backend-microservice-development), so a sequence exists, but there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops — e.g., no 'verify the component renders empty/loading/error states before finishing'. This matches anchor 3 (sequence present, checkpoints missing or implicit); it is not 4 because no checkpoint is stated anywhere, and not 2 because the decision flow for routing to sibling skills is coherent. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), and the skill is under 50 lines with clear, well-organized sections; per the simple-skill guidance this warrants a 5. The 延伸阅读 section signals one-level-deep cross-references to sibling skills (api-interface-design, backend-microservice-development) clearly rather than burying them. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |