A lean, well-structured routing skill whose checklists and decision criteria are genuinely actionable, with good progressive disclosure for its size. The main weaknesses are duplicated routing criteria between 快速指导 and 任务分流, unspecified checklist output formats, and a missing error-recovery loop after verification.

Suggestions

Merge the routing criteria: state them once in 任务分流 and have 快速指导 reference those categories, removing the duplicated OpenSpec/multi-Agent/impact triggers.

Specify what a completed impact or verification checklist output should look like (e.g., a short table of verified/unverified/remaining-risk items), since the current guidance asks questions without defining the deliverable.

Add one feedback step for the failure case, e.g., 'if verification fails, fix and re-run the affected check before closing out', to complete the workflow's error-recovery loop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense with no concept explanations or padding, but 快速指导 steps 2–5 and the 任务分流 categories restate the same routing criteria (module count, risk, OpenSpec/multi-Agent triggers) in two places. That duplication could be trimmed, matching the 'efficient, minor instances that could be tightened' anchor rather than a 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Decision rules are concrete and executable ("跨 2 个以上微服务或核心模块", "涉及权限、兼容性、迁移、灰度、回滚") with specific paths ("openspec/changes/<change>/", "ai/evals/", "../../HARNESS.md"). Not a 5 because the checklists pose questions without specifying the expected output format or an example of a completed triage result.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 6-step 快速指导 gives a clear sequence with an impact checklist before implementation and a verification checklist after, acting as explicit checkpoints. Not a 5 because error-recovery feedback is limited to a '沉淀到 ai/evals' rule — there is no validate → fix → retry loop if verification fails.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is self-contained (~63 lines), cleanly sectioned, and its 延伸阅读 pointers (skill-context-first, openspec-first, multi-agent-workflow, ../../HARNESS.md) are one level deep and clearly signaled. Per the simple-skill guidance, a short skill needing no external files earns top marks with well-organized sections alone.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A solid, appropriately scoped description that answers both what and when in third person, with concrete domain-specific trigger terms and no fluff. Its main gaps are unenumerated trigger variations and slight overlap risk with the sibling workflow skills it references.

Suggestions

Enumerate a couple of explicit user-side trigger phrases (e.g., 'use when asked whether a task needs OpenSpec, multi-Agent, or an impact analysis') to push completeness and trigger coverage from good to comprehensive.

Clarify the boundary against siblings in the description itself, e.g., 'routing only; execution rules live in openspec-first and multi-agent-workflow', to reduce conflict risk.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("BK-CI AI 编码任务分流") and several concrete actions ("判断日常任务是否需要 OpenSpec、多 Agent、影响面清单或验证清单"), matching the several-specific-actions anchor. Not a 5 because it omits capabilities the body actually covers, such as the module skill reading budget and the Plan Mode option.	4 / 5
Completeness	Both parts are present: an explicit when-clause ("处理 BK-CI AI 编码任务分流时使用") and a concrete what (judging the need for OpenSpec, multi-Agent, impact and verification checklists). Not a 5 because the when-clause relies on one framing sentence rather than enumerating concrete trigger phrases.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes the natural trigger terms a user of this workflow would say ("OpenSpec", "多 Agent", "影响面清单", "验证清单"), giving good keyword coverage. Not a 5 because common variations such as "轻流程", "流程选择" or "影响面分析" are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It occupies a clear niche (triage/routing decisions for BK-CI AI coding tasks) and is mostly distinct from sibling skills. Not a 5 because naming OpenSpec and multi-Agent creates minor overlap risk with the openspec-first and multi-agent-workflow skills it routes to.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: TencentBlueKing/bk-ci
Path: ai/skills/lightweight-ai-workflow/SKILL.md
Commit: d5420f2

Reviewed: 9 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.