Content
75%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 decision-skill body with concrete steps, completion criteria, and thoughtful boundary/guardrail sections. It loses points mainly to trimmable audit/metadata padding and a dangling reference rather than to substance.
Suggestions
Remove the 审计信息 block (验证通过/蒸馏时间) and the duplicated '相关 skills (阶段 3 定稿)' section — the frontmatter already records related_skills, so this is pure padding.
Delete or resolve the dangling '见 test-results.md' reference, since no test-results.md bundle file exists.
Add a short worked example in the E section that applies the four steps to one concrete user decision, raising actionability from concrete-but-conceptual to fully templated.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient and well-structured with no over-explanation of known concepts, but the audit block ('验证通过 V1✓/V2✓/V3✓', '蒸馏时间 2026-08-01') and the duplicated '相关 skills (阶段 3 定稿)' section are tokens that do not earn their place. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The E section gives four concrete steps each with 完成标准 and 判停条件, and the B section adds failure-mode guardrails — mostly executable guidance, but it is heuristic/conceptual with no worked example applying the steps to a user's own decision. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear four-step sequence (判断重大决定 → 跑决策门 → 选短期更痛苦 → 分配时间) with completion-standard checkpoints and a stop-condition in step 3, but there is no true validate→fix→retry feedback loop on the output. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into labeled R/I/A1/A2/E/B sections with no bundle files to navigate; minor gaps are the inline audit/meta noise and the dangling '见 test-results.md' reference to a non-existent file. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |