Content
77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The workflow is highly actionable and clearly sequenced with the validation and resume checkpoints a batch research job needs. The main weakness is token efficiency, driven by the duplicated one-shot example.
Suggestions
Collapse the one-shot example into a brief inline illustration or move it to a reference file, since it repeats the template structure almost verbatim.
Consider extracting the prompt template to a referenced file (e.g. prompt_template.md) with a clear link, keeping only the variable bindings inline.
Tighten the Agent配置 and Step 4 sections, which partly restate constraints already implied by the prompt and batch gating.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly tight and assumes Claude's competence, but the ~25-line one-shot example largely duplicates the prompt template and could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives a complete executable f-string prompt, explicit parameter bindings, slugify rules, and a concrete validation command — fully copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–5 are clearly sequenced with a validation checkpoint ('验证通过后才算完成任务'), user-gated batch progression, and resume-skip logic — appropriate feedback loops for a batch operation. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well organized with no nested references, but the prompt template and one-shot example are kept inline rather than split into a reference file with signaled navigation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |