Content
67%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 is a well-sequenced, actionable five-step workflow with properly signaled one-level references. Its main weakness is verbosity from repeated principles and an over-specified blank-fill output template.
Suggestions
State the 'learn methodology, not copy content' principle once in step 4 and reference it elsewhere instead of repeating it 3–4 times.
Condense the step-4 output template; replace the large blank-fill scaffolding with a compact required-fields list and one fully filled example.
De-duplicate the analysis dimensions: keep step 2 as a brief pointer to references/analysis-framework.md rather than re-inlining all six dimensions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Content is task-specific with no padding about concepts Claude already knows, but the '学习方法论而非复制内容' principle and the ±5% length rule are each restated 3–4 times, and the blank-fill output template in step 4 is long; it could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides an executable script command, two concrete input methods, specific analysis questions, and a structured output template; minor gap is the hardcoded absolute script path which limits portability. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence with a fallback checkpoint in step 1 (auto-extract → manual) and an originality check in step 4; minor validation gaps remain but no destructive/batch cap applies. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are one level deep and clearly signaled with read-time hints and a resource index, but the six analysis dimensions are inlined in step 2 while also living in references/analysis-framework.md, a minor duplication. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |