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 presents a well-sequenced 4-phase retrieval loop with concrete scoring thresholds and two worked examples that make the pattern easy to follow. Its weaknesses are pseudocode that calls undefined helper functions, some duplication (diagram, repeated relevance tiers, repeated prompt block), and a monolithic single-file layout at ~215 lines with no progressive-disclosure structure.
Suggestions
Make the code executable or explicitly justify it as pseudocode: define or stub the helper functions (retrieveFiles, scoreRelevance, extractPatterns, hasCriticalGaps, mergeContext), or reduce the code blocks to the essential loop logic.
Trim duplication: drop the decorative ASCII diagram (the numbered phases already convey the cycle) and state the relevance tiers once instead of in both code comments and the 评分标准 list.
At ~215 lines, move the two worked examples into a references/EXAMPLES.md and link it from a short section, giving the SKILL.md a leaner overview with one-level-deep references.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient — it does not re-explain what agents or retrieval are — but the ASCII box diagram adds no information over the numbered phases, the relevance tiers are stated twice (in code comments and again as the 评分标准 list), and the 与智能体集成 prompt block repeats the phase list. This matches 'Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' rather than the lean 4-5. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The JavaScript examples depend on undefined helpers (retrieveFiles, scoreRelevance, explainRelevance, extractPatterns, hasCriticalGaps, mergeContext), so they are illustrative pseudocode rather than executable code — precisely the anchor-3 description. The concrete thresholds (relevance >= 0.7, max 3 cycles) and the ready-to-embed agent prompt keep it above 2. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 4-phase loop (调度→评估→优化→循环) is clearly sequenced with an explicit stopping rule — at least 3 files at relevance >= 0.7 with no critical gaps, hard-capped at 3 cycles — and the two worked examples walk every cycle, giving a real validation checkpoint. It falls short of 5 because there is no guidance for the failure case (e.g. zero relevant files after all cycles). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a single-file skill with no references/, scripts/, or assets/ bundle and no well-signaled pointer files; sections are cleanly organized, but at ~215 lines the worked examples and best practices are candidates for a separate file, and the only external pointers are a bare X post link and skill names without paths. This matches 'Some structure but could be better organized' rather than the clear one-level-deep reference structure of 4-5. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |