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 body is highly actionable with concrete formulas, tables, quantified thresholds, and copy-paste templates, and the review workflow is clearly sequenced with checklists. It loses points on conciseness (redundant restatements) and progressive disclosure (monolithic single-file layout with only external references).
Suggestions
De-duplicate the body: the "常见错误" table repeats the "错误承接" examples and the "完整检查流程" repeats the per-dimension checklists — keep one canonical version of each and cross-reference it.
Move the worked example and detailed formula tables into reference files under ./references/ and link to them from a leaner SKILL.md overview, so the skill practices the one-level-deep progressive disclosure it currently lacks.
Tighten verbose sections (e.g., repeated "适用" lines and multi-example lists) to one representative example per formula to reduce token cost.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is actionable and free of basic-concept padding, but it is verbose and redundant — the "错误承接" examples are restated in the "常见错误" table, and the "完整检查流程" restates the per-dimension checklists. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Highly concrete for an instruction-only skill: five named formulas with formats and examples, type-selection tables, quantified criteria (15-25字, 0-5个字, 30秒-1分钟), and copy-paste-ready opening/承接 templates. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear Step 1-4 sequence with explicit per-dimension checklists acting as validation checkpoints, plus a sequenced 开头→中段→结尾 承接 structure. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the entire ~400-line body is inline in one file; the two "参考资源" paths are external knowledge-base files rather than well-signaled one-level-deep bundle references, and detail that could be split out is kept inline. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |