Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured skill with good workflow clarity and appropriate conciseness. The main weakness is that templates use placeholders rather than concrete, copy-paste ready examples with actual values. Adding one complete worked example with real component name and props would significantly improve actionability.
Suggestions
Add one complete worked example showing all three files with actual values (e.g., a 'Button' component) instead of just placeholder templates
Replace placeholder comments like '// 定义 props 类型' with concrete prop examples (e.g., 'label: string; onClick?: () => void;')
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Content is lean and efficient, presenting only necessary information without explaining basic React concepts Claude already knows. Every section serves a clear purpose. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides templates with placeholders rather than fully executable code. The {ComponentName} placeholders require substitution, and the templates contain comments like '// 定义 props 类型' instead of concrete examples. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 5-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoint in the quality check section. Includes feedback loop: 'If errors, display error info and provide fix suggestions.' | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, the content is well-organized with clear sections (规范, 流程, 质量检查) that are easy to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |