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.
The body is well-structured and actionable, with a clear multi-step workflow, concrete search strings, a report template, and a working external reference. Its main weakness is conciseness — the glossary and ASCII scaffolding restate knowledge Claude already has and inflate the token budget.
Suggestions
Move the 专业术语词典 (RSI/MACD/VIX/P/E etc.) and the ASCII chart scaffolding into references/methodology.md, since Claude already knows these terms; keep only skill-specific scoring ranges in SKILL.md.
Add an explicit validation/retry loop in the workflow for the common failure modes — e.g. '若关键数据缺失 → 重试搜索 → 仍缺失则降低置信度并标注' — to turn the implicit confidence note into a real checkpoint.
Tighten Step 3 逐维打分 by replacing prose scoring ranges with a compact scoring table (维度 | 满分 | 评分依据) so the same information occupies fewer tokens.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient but includes padding Claude already knows — a full 术语词典 explaining RSI/MACD/布林带/VIX/P/E/EPS, ASCII art scaffolding, and restated methodology — that could be trimmed; the 概率分布 and 走势图 ASCII examples add length without adding decision value. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, copy-ready scaffolding: exact search-query strings, a scoring rubric with point ranges, a report template, file-naming convention ({TICKER}-next-day-forecast-{YYYYMMDD}.md), and a pre-output checklist; minor gaps because the 'scoring' is qualitative guidance rather than executable code. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 5-step sequence (解析输入 → 多线搜索 → 逐维打分 → 三情景概率 → 输出报告) with a final 质量检查清单 acting as a validation checkpoint; not a 5 because there is no explicit validate-and-retry loop when data is incomplete or signals conflict, only a confidence-lowering note. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with a clearly signaled one-level reference to references/methodology.md (verified present) for the detailed framework, while SKILL.md stays an overview with templates and checklists; not a 5 because the 术语词典 and ASCII specs could arguably live in the reference file. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |