Content
61%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-organized, highly concrete financial-analysis reference with actionable thresholds, a scoring rubric, and an output template. Its weaknesses are a generic-textbook opening layer that competes with token budget, fragmentary code, and no explicitly sequenced analysis workflow tying the sections into an ordered procedure.
Suggestions
Add an explicit step sequence at the top (1. 取数(tushare) → 2. 勾稽验证 → 3. 盈利质量评分 → 4. 红旗检查 → 5. 杜邦分解 → 6. 按输出格式生成报告), turning the implicit section order into a stated workflow.
Trim the textbook material Claude already knows — the income-statement waterfall, 资产=负债+权益, and CFO/CFI/CFF definitions — keeping only the domain-specific judgment (thresholds, warning signs, A股/港股准则差异).
Either complete the Python verification snippets (variable sources, tushare fetch) so they are copy-paste runnable, or reduce them to the thresholds themselves and state the computation in one sentence.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The reference material is dense (thresholds, tables, formulas) and mostly earns its tokens, but several sections restate concepts Claude already knows — the income-statement waterfall, "资产 = 负债 + 所有者权益", standard definitions of CFO/CFI/CFF, and the basic DuPont identity. This matches 'Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened'; it is not 2 because there is no padded prose and the tables are compact. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance dominates: exact thresholds ("accrual_ratio > 10%", "CFO/净利润 < 0.5", "商誉/净资产 > 30%"), a weighted scoring card, a verification formula block, and a copy-paste output template — matching 'Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps'. It is not 5 because the Python snippets are fragmentary (no data-loading context for tushare, undefined variables) and data acquisition is only hinted at. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is an implicit sequence via section ordering and the 输出格式 template, and the 勾稽验证公式 block provides checkpoints, but no explicit ordered analysis workflow (fetch data → verify勾稽 → score quality → check flags → DuPont → render report). This matches 'Steps listed but validation gaps; sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit'. Not destructive/batch, so no hard cap applies, and it is not 4 because the checkpoints are scattered rather than sequenced. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single-file skill is organized into clear, well-navigable sections (三表框架 → 勾稽 → 盈利质量 → 红旗 → 杜邦 → 输出格式 → 注意事项) with no nested or dangling references, matching 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed'. It is not 5 because at ~260 lines, detail blocks like the 12-red-flag table and industry ROE comparison could arguably live in reference files, and not 3 since what is inline is coherent as one reference document rather than misplaced API-style content. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |