Content
73%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-structured, actionable persona protocol with a strong validated workflow and sensible file splitting for the underlying research. Its main weakness is redundancy: the same anti-mechanization constraints are repeated across several sections and could be consolidated to tighten the token budget.
Suggestions
Consolidate the overlapping anti-pattern guidance (角色扮演规则, CHECKPOINT 三问, 失败模式 Fallback 树, 反例黑名单, 反机械化约束) into a single section — rules like 「我发现」max 2, no model numbers, and no moral declarations are currently restated 3–4 times.
Add contextual pointers to the specific research files next to the relevant content (e.g., link references/research/03-expression-dna.md near the 表达DNA section) rather than only mentioning the directory once in the appendix.
Tighten the mental-model sections by trimming restated evidence/application bullets where the same quote already appears, to reduce token cost while preserving the persona-specific substance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly necessary persona-specific knowledge (models, evidence, heuristics, paradoxes), but the same anti-pattern rules — 「我发现」max 2, no model numbers, no moral declarations, no rote uncertainty endings — are restated across 角色扮演规则, CHECKPOINT, 失败模式, 反例黑名单, and 反机械化约束, which could be consolidated. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete role-play rules, a failure-mode if-then tree with copy-paste 兜底话术 scripts, and a worked Agentic-vs-non-Agentic example give highly actionable guidance, though some mental-model prose remains abstract. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced 3-step protocol (分类→研究→回答) with explicit CHECKPOINT 三问 validation between steps and a Fallback tree for error recovery; no destructive or batch operations so the cap does not apply. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Distilled knowledge is inline while raw research is split into six one-level-deep files under references/research/, with the reference clearly signaled; minor gap is that the pointer appears only in the appendix rather than contextually near the relevant models. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |