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 a well-structured distillation with a genuinely actionable 4-step execution workflow including a retry loop, and honest boundary sections (failure modes, author blind spots). Main deductions are for repeated adjacent-skill distinctions, audit metadata, and a dangling test-results.md reference.
Suggestions
State the adjacent-skill distinction once (keep the A2 section or the B section) and drop the other two mentions plus the audit section to tighten the token budget.
Add failure handling for steps 2–3 of the workflow (e.g., what to do when no candidate passes the uniqueness×scalability test) and one worked example of a passing special-knowledge candidate.
Fix or remove the dangling 「见 test-results.md」 reference and the unresolvable sibling-skill pointers, or move them to a properly linked references file.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly tight and bullet-driven, but there is redundancy and meta-padding: the adjacent-skill distinction (wealth-structure / reading-metaskill) is stated three times (A2 「与相邻 skill 的区分」, B 「容易混淆的邻近方法论」, and 「相关 skills」), and the audit section (「验证通过」「测试通过率: 见 test-results.md」「蒸馏时间」) adds tokens with no usage value. This fits anchor 3 (mostly efficient but could be tightened) rather than 4, where only minor trimming would be needed. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The E section gives four concrete steps with explicit completion criteria and numeric specifics (「列出 3–5 个『对你像玩、对别人像工作』的事」「30 天内发布一个最小作品（一篇文章/一个工具/一个内容系列），公开署名」「每季度重问」) — actionable instruction-only guidance. Not a 5 because steps 2–4 rely on self-assessment questions without example prompts, templates, or worked cases of what a passing candidate looks like. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The E section is a clearly sequenced 1→4 workflow with an explicit feedback loop in step 1 (「判停条件: 若找到的事可以被培训/被替代，回到步骤 1 继续找」) and a quarterly re-check loop in step 4. It misses anchor 5 because steps 2–3 have completion criteria but no failure handling — e.g., what to do if no candidate passes the uniqueness×scalability test in step 2. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single-file skill with clean, well-labeled sections (R/I/A1/A2/E/B) and no nested references — appropriate for a ~100-line framework skill that needs no bundle files. It does not reach 5 because 「测试通过率: 见 test-results.md」 references a file that does not exist in the skill bundle (a dangling pointer), and the cross-references to sibling skills (wealth-structure, reading-metaskill, long-term-compounding) are not resolvable from this skill's directory. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |