Content
85%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 well-structured with a clear 7-step workflow, mandatory verification steps, and a final self-check checklist. Bundle files are appropriately referenced one level deep with clear navigation, and the content stays lean without over-explaining concepts Claude already knows.
Suggestions
Replace the personal example path /Users/digoal/new/markdown/... with a generic placeholder (e.g., <cwd>/markdown/) to avoid embedding machine-specific paths.
Add an explicit error-recovery note for Step 2 (what to do when web_search returns nothing or conflicting data) to strengthen the feedback loop.
Consider trimming the "何时不要使用" section or merging it into "何时使用" to further tighten token efficiency.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean for a complex report-generation skill, assuming Claude's competence without explaining basic concepts; a few minor trim candidates exist (e.g., the personal example path /Users/digoal/new/markdown/...). | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete tool names (AskUserQuestion, mcp__MiniMax__web_search), specific reference files, explicit output paths, and SVG rules; as an instruction-only reasoning skill it lacks copy-paste code but the guidance is actionable with minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Seven clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints — Step 2 mandates web verification (禁止只用训练记忆, 二次核实 for financial products) and Step 7 provides a checkbox self-checklist for complex output. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-signaled one-level-deep references: body points to references/evaluation-framework.md and assets/report-skeleton.md, a Resources section lists each with descriptions, and the empty scripts/ dir is explained rather than left ambiguous. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |