Content
81%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, actionable workflow skill with clear sequencing, validation checkpoints, and properly signaled one-level references. The main improvement area is reducing redundancy between the inline checklists and their reference-file counterparts.
Suggestions
Trim the inline 16-bullet 'Article Requirements' list to a short summary and rely on references/article-structure.md for the full checklist, since the reference already contains it verbatim.
Reduce the 'Validation' bullet list to the few items not already covered by references/validation-checklist.md, pointing to that file for the full run-through.
Add one concrete worked example of the thesis-logic block (观点/成立前提/支撑证据/前提崩塌) filled in for a sample repo, so the fill-in format is unambiguous on first use.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean and assumes Claude's competence without explaining known concepts, but the 16-bullet 'Article Requirements' list and the 'Validation' list duplicate content already in references/article-structure.md and references/validation-checklist.md, so a few sections could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable guidance — specific MCP tool names ('mcp__deepwiki__read_wiki_structure', 'mcp__deepwiki__ask_question'), a concrete output path 'markdown/<repo-slug>.md', a naming convention example, and a fill-in thesis-logic block — with only minor gaps for an instruction-only skill. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Non-Negotiable Source Order' and 'Evidence Workflow' are clearly numbered and sequenced, with explicit checkpoints ('If README cannot be fetched, stop and report'), feedback loops ('If validation finds weak evidence, revise the article before saving'), and referenced checklists for the complex process. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are one level deep and clearly signaled ('Read references/article-structure.md before drafting. Use it as the mandatory content checklist.'), and both referenced files exist; the minor gap is the inlined article-requirements checklist that largely belongs in the reference. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |