Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A concise, highly actionable skill body with correct progressive disclosure to its one real bundle script. The main weakness is workflow clarity on the write path: the mandatory revision-recording checkpoint exists, but there is no validate/retry loop to confirm appended citations are well-formed before recording.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation step before Step 5 — e.g. re-read the 史记引文 section to confirm each new '> 出自' line links and truncates correctly, and only record the revision once verified.
Make the feedback loop explicit: if a reconstructed citation is empty or over-length after truncation, drop or re-fetch it rather than appending blindly.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient — assumes Claude's knowledge of the wiki, gives exact commands, regex tables, and a formatting spec with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Fully executable guidance: copy-paste bash commands with the exact script path, an entity-type→regex mapping table with worked examples, and a concrete '> 出自 [[...]] （NNN-N）：...' output template. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Five steps are clearly sequenced with an append-only rule and a mandatory 'record revision' checkpoint, but for batch page edits there is no validate-then-fix feedback loop (e.g. verify the appended citation renders/links correctly before recording), which the rubric requires for a 3 on batch-write operations. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized overview that correctly references the single one-level-deep bundle file at its real path ('python3 .claude/skills/quote/scripts/quote_page.py'), which exists in ./scripts/quote_page.py — no nested references, easy navigation. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |