Content
92%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is lean, highly actionable, and clearly sequenced with verification checkpoints; its only weakness is that everything lives inline in a single file with no reference split, leaving progressive_disclosure below the top anchor.
Suggestions
Extract the detailed 审查维度 criteria or the i18n key rules into a reference file (e.g. references/review-dimensions.md) and link to it from SKILL.md to enable one-level-deep progressive disclosure.
Consider moving the full output-format template into a references/ template file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview pointing to it.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body delivers only task-relevant review judgment criteria and concrete commands without explaining concepts Claude already knows (no 'what is a PR/diff' filler); each section earns its place with domain-specific guidance like the i18n key rules. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides copy-ready commands with exact fields ('gh pr view <pr> ... files,additions,deletions,commits'), concrete judgment categories (合理扩散/可疑越界/高风险越界), and specific forbidden i18n patterns, matching the 'fully executable... copy-paste ready' anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Sequenced flow (入口判断 → 信息收集 → 审查维度 → 深挖方法 → 输出格式) with explicit verification checkpoints — 'git status --short' guard before switching PRs, 'git show upstream/main:<path>...确认不是误读', and a required '验证盲区' statement even when no issues are found. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and all ~150 lines are inline in one well-sectioned file; detail such as the four 审查维度 and the i18n key rules could be split into reference files, matching 'some structure... content that should be separate is inline'. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |