Content
88%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 tight, highly actionable process skill with strong validation checkpoints and feedback loops for destructive merge operations and one well-signaled reference file. Could improve by deduplicating repeated rules and splitting more procedural detail into references.
Suggestions
Consolidate the repeated 're-fetch origin/develop before judging/merging' and 'conflict → abort + BLOCKED_BY_CONFLICTS' rules into a single canonical statement referenced where needed, to reduce conciseness loss.
Consider moving the detailed '本地合并和验证' sub-procedure into a references file (e.g. references/merge-procedure.md) and keeping only the gating checklist inline, improving progressive disclosure.
Add a brief pointer at the top of the body to the review-checklist.md sections (功能与数据 / 架构边界 / 协议凭据 / 测试证据) so reviewers can jump to the relevant checklist area by risk type.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Dense and task-oriented with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; earns a 4 rather than 5 because the re-fetch-origin/develop rule and conflict-abort procedure are each restated in multiple sections and could be tightened. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready concrete commands ('gh pr list', 'git merge --no-ff <pr-head>', 'git merge --abort', '--ff-only', proxy env vars), named branch patterns, a literal handoff prompt template, and explicit decision labels — fully executable guidance covering common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sequenced multi-step process with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops for destructive/batch operations: verify mergeable + required checks, $oc-verify L1/L2, ff-only check, abort-on-conflict, re-verify when origin/develop advances, push only after VERIFIED — fully satisfying the destructive-ops validation requirement. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with a clearly signaled one-level-deep reference to references/review-checklist.md (verified to exist) that externalizes the checklist and English feedback templates; the main body is nonetheless a fairly long procedural wall that could split some detailed merge sub-steps into a reference. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |