Content
78%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.
A concise, well-structured instruction-only protocol with a clear sequenced workflow and explicit validation/decision checkpoints. The main improvement area is adding a retry loop for failed validation rather than only abort conditions.
Suggestions
Trim the 'Expected Outcomes' section or merge it into the Overview to reduce mildly aspirational padding.
Add an explicit feedback loop in the Validation section (e.g., if endorsement is narrow, return to Gather Recommendations and widen consultation) rather than only abort conditions.
Clarify how to measure '功用既兴' accomplishments concretely so the Evaluate Performance step is reproducible rather than subjective.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and efficient with well-organized sections, though the 'Expected Outcomes' section is mildly aspirational ('Public confidence', 'Reduced risk') and could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific protocol steps with named roles and terms (岳牧, 功用既兴, 天下重器); for an instruction-only skill the guidance is actionable with only minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced four-step process with explicit Decision Points (abort conditions) and a Validation section, but it lacks an explicit fix-and-retry feedback loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references, yet organized into clear, well-signaled sections (Overview, Steps, Decision Points, Expected Outcomes, Validation). | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |