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 translation workflow with clear sequencing, concrete commands and field rules, and a final validation checklist. Minor gains available from a worked meta.json example and inter-step validation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Add a short before/after meta.json ↔ meta.en.json example to make navigation sync fully copy-paste concrete.
Insert an explicit validate-then-proceed checkpoint between translation and the final review (e.g. residual-character scan before listing completed files) to strengthen the feedback loop.
Trim terminology examples in 翻译原则 that duplicate the shared glossary to reduce redundancy.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and assumes Claude's competence (no basic-concept padding), with concrete ✓/✗ examples; the 翻译原则 section repeats some terminology guidance already implied by the shared glossary reference. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance throughout — file-naming conventions ('{name}.mdx → {name}.en.mdx'), commands ('git diff --name-only'), and explicit keep/translate field lists; a full meta.json before/after example would close minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced four-step workflow with a step-4 validation checklist and feedback loops ('发现禁用译法时必须修正', '无法可靠判断位置时，先询问用户'); validation is largely post-hoc rather than inter-step checkpoints. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep external references (translation-guidelines.md, fastgpt-glossary.json) via markdown links; detailed term lists are appropriately split out rather than inlined. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |