Content
86%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-sequenced procedural skill with concrete examples, named precedents, and an end-of-workflow validation block. The main improvement area is converting a few abstract directives into more prescriptive, checkpoint-style guidance.
Suggestions
Tighten abstract directives like 'Practice benevolent governance' and 'Maintain discipline' into concrete, verifiable actions.
Add validation checkpoints between phases (e.g., confirm just cause before alliance building) rather than only at the end, to strengthen the destructive-operation feedback loop.
Add brief exit/abort criteria for cases where the just-cause or consensus preconditions are not met.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean bullet-point protocol with no padding or re-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line states a concrete step, phrase, or example that earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete guidance — exact declaration phrases ('匪台小子敢行举乱'), named examples (箕子, 比干), and specific rules (6-7 steps) — though a few items like 'Practice benevolent governance' and 'Maintain discipline' remain somewhat abstract. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear five-phase sequence (Pre-Campaign → Alliance → Declaration → Battle → Post-Victory) with a dedicated Validation section for this destructive operation; checkpoints are consolidated at the end rather than interspersed, leaving minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Self-contained document with no bundle files needed; content is well-organized into clearly headed sections that make navigation easy without nested references. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |