Content
56%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 delivers a well-sequenced, genuinely actionable analysis workflow with real formulas, thresholds, file paths, and error handling — but it is bloated by redundant content: full report templates restated three times as worked examples, duplicated sections, and descriptive filler bullets. With no bundle files at all, everything lives in one 630-line SKILL.md instead of being progressively disclosed.
Suggestions
Split the ~90-line report templates and the three complete example outputs into references/report-template.md and references/examples.md, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with one-line links — this fixes both the conciseness and progressive-disclosure weaknesses at once.
De-duplicate: remove the second '## 使用示例' section (场景1–5, which repeats the trigger/execution info already stated), keep only one report template format instead of full + brief + three rendered examples, and merge the overlapping 使用示例/示例 blocks.
Replace descriptive analysis bullets ('识别ROM平台期或倒退', '识别疼痛加重/缓解模式') with concrete methods — e.g., plateau = |改善速率| < threshold over N weeks, regression outlier checks — so every analysis step is executable rather than merely named.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~630-line body is noticeably verbose: it includes a full report template AND a brief report template AND three complete example outputs that re-render those templates nearly verbatim (示例1–3), a duplicated '## 使用示例' heading (lines 418 and 597), and many bullets that only name an analysis ('分析晨起疼痛趋势', '识别肌力提升模式') without adding information Claude doesn't have. It is above level 1 because it doesn't explain generic background concepts, but well below level 3's 'mostly efficient'. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is mostly concrete and executable: exact data paths (data/rehabilitation-tracker.json, data/rehabilitation-logs/YYYY-MM/YYYY-MM-DD.json), named JSON fields per file, real formulas (依从性 = 实际/计划 × 100%, 预测时间 = 当前日期 + (目标值-当前值)/改善速率, 7日移动平均), and quantitative thresholds (疼痛±20%, 依从性 90/75/60% bands, 准备度 80/60%). Below level 5 because a substantial share of the analysis steps are descriptive bullets ('识别ROM平台期或倒退', '识别疼痛加重/缓解模式') with no specified method. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Seven steps are clearly sequenced (read data → functional trends → pain → adherence → goals → phase → report), Step 1 contains an explicit validation checkpoint (file existence, structure integrity, minimum 3 assessments / 10 days of data), and the 错误处理 section gives specific error messages with recovery actions — a genuine feedback loop. Below level 5 because there is no validation between analysis steps and the '计算异常' recovery ('请稍后重试') is a dead end rather than a fix-and-retry loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body has good section headers (核心功能, 执行步骤, 输出格式, 分析算法, 错误处理) making it navigable, but there are no bundle files at all (no references/, scripts/, or assets/): the ~90-line report templates and the three complete example outputs clearly belong in separate reference files yet are fully inlined, making SKILL.md itself ~630 lines. This matches 'Some structure but could be better organized; content that should be separate is inline' — above level 2 because headers exist, below level 4 because nothing is split out. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |