Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is concise, highly actionable, and clearly sequenced, with strong templates and a checklist. Its only notable gap is progressive disclosure: everything is inline with no one-level-deep reference files, despite content that would benefit from being split out.
Suggestions
Move the substantial Commit Message bilingual-format section (type table + examples) into a references/ file and link to it from SKILL.md, keeping only a concise summary inline.
Extract the 中英混排代码注释规范 rules into a separate reference file so SKILL.md stays a focused overview of review communication.
Add a short navigation table at the top pointing to those reference files once split, so reviewers can quickly jump to commit-format or commenting-norm details.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and built from tables, before/after example pairs, and copy-paste templates; it assumes Claude already knows code review and avoids padding with basic concept explanations. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete executable guidance: severity labels ([必须修复]/[建议修改]/[仅供参考]), a commit-message type table with examples, review-comment templates, and a final checklist — all copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The "审查流程建议" section sequences 开始审查前 → 审查顺序 (6 ordered checks) → 给出总结, and the closing checklist reinforces it; no destructive/batch operation requires validation feedback loops here. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and all content sits inline in a ~150-line SKILL.md; the well-organized sections help, but sizable reference-style blocks (commit-message bilingual format, comment-norm rules) could be split into separate files rather than kept inline. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |