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.
A well-structured, genuinely actionable skill: concrete search protocol, quantified brainstorm/filter parameters, an explicit under-5 fallback loop, and an output template. Its weaknesses are redundancy (criteria restated twice outside the 七条标准 section), a hardcoded stale date that contradicts the 'use the real current date' instruction, and the absence of a single worked question+reason example.
Suggestions
Remove the hardcoded date "今天是 2026 年 7 月 2 日" from 第二步 and instead instruct Claude to check the actual current date at runtime before constructing 近期热点 queries — the fixed date is already stale and partially contradicts the '用真实的当前时间' guidance.
Deduplicate the criteria: the 第四步 elimination list and the 拒绝黑白分明/拒绝假大空/理由必须落地 bullets in 注意事项 restate 标准 6, 5, and 2 — consolidate each point into one location and cross-reference it instead of repeating it.
Add one worked example (a sample 问题 + 理由 pair citing a concrete phenomenon/company/data point) so the intended concreteness of the deliverable is shown, not just described.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient — concrete counts, short sections, no explanations of concepts Claude doesn't know — but there is real redundancy: the 第四步 elimination list and the entire 注意事项 section restate criteria 2, 5, and 6 (拒绝黑白分明/拒绝假大空/理由必须落地 duplicate the 七条标准), the preamble philosophizes about 好问题是稀缺资源, and step 2 hardcodes a stale time-sensitive date ("今天是 2026 年 7 月 2 日") outside any 'old patterns' section, which also risks misleading the retrieval step. This fits 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' rather than 'minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed', since the duplication spans whole sections and the date is a correctness hazard. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The guidance is largely executable and specific: named tools (web_search/web_fetch), concrete search keywords ("痛点"/"难题"/"顽疾"), quantitative parameters (每个方向 2-3 次搜索、查询词 1-6 个词、10-15 个候选、保留 5-8 个), a per-dimension checklist for writing 理由, and a copy-ready markdown output template. It falls short of the top anchor only because it never shows one worked example of a question + reason pair — the skill's core deliverable — so the 'common case' is described but not exemplified. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five steps are clearly sequenced with purposes, and there is an explicit feedback loop ("如果筛选后不足 5 个，回到第三步继续挖掘，而不是降低标准") plus final self-checks ("写完之后自己读一遍每个问题…如果脑子里立刻蹦出一个'标准答案'，说明不合格"). Not a 5 because step 2's instruction to use the real current date is undercut by the hardcoded "今天是 2026 年 7 月 2 日" (now stale), a minor incoherence in the most fragile step; and no validation checkpoint confirms the 理由 actually cite the recorded 检索素材 before output. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), and the ~90-line body is organized into clear, well-ordered sections (什么是好问题 / 工作流程 / 输出格式 / 注意事项) that are all needed in a single pass — nothing is obviously shippable to a separate reference. It is not a 5 under the small-skill exception only because it exceeds 50 lines and the 七条标准 section (with its failure-mode commentary) is the kind of scoring rubric that could live in a one-level-deep reference file; it is not a 3 because nothing that clearly belongs elsewhere is inlined and navigation is trivial. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |