Content
61%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 lean, well-organized instruction body with unusually strong epistemic guardrails and good worked examples, undermined by a dangling primary reference: Workflows/DiscoverMechanism.md is missing, so the core four-step procedure is never actually defined anywhere in the bundle. Actionability and workflow clarity suffer accordingly.
Suggestions
Add the missing Workflows/DiscoverMechanism.md (or inline the four-step procedure in the body) so the routing table's primary entry point resolves and the steps 看反常/追过程/分解释/带条件迁移 are operationally defined.
For each of the four steps, specify one or two concrete moves or checks (e.g. what counts as an anomaly worth chasing, how to phrase a distinguishing prediction between competing explanations) so the body is actionable even without the workflow file.
If no external detail is needed, drop the Workflows reference entirely and rely on the well-organized in-body sections, which alone would satisfy progressive disclosure for a sub-50-line skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~36-line body is dense and lean with zero padding: it explains nothing Claude already knows, every bullet carries a non-obvious guardrail (e.g. 「不给每个简单问题硬加图、公式或固定数量的假说」, 「把同一论文的多次转述计作多个独立证据，会夸大支持」). Every token earns its place, matching the 5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | There is concrete guidance (mechanism statements must specify 「谁或什么，在什么条件下，通过哪些中间变化，生成什么结果」; sources placed next to judgments with evidence-type labels; offline mode 「不能声称已联网验证」; three worked examples), but the core procedure for executing the four steps is delegated to Workflows/DiscoverMechanism.md, which does not exist in the bundle. Key details are missing, fitting the 3 anchor rather than 4, where gaps would be minor. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The routing table sequences the main cases and 研究约定 supplies validation checkpoints (verify the raw phenomenon, test competing explanations, distinguish evidence scope), but the four-step sequence 「看反常—追过程—分解释—带条件迁移」 is only ever named, never elaborated, and the file that would contain the workflow is absent. Steps are listed with real gaps, matching the 3 anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body itself is well-sectioned and the one reference is clearly signaled in the routing table, but Workflows/DiscoverMechanism.md — the primary navigation target and the only reference in the skill — does not exist in the bundle (no references/, scripts/, assets/, or Workflows/ directories are present). A clearly signaled yet nonexistent main reference is a hard navigation failure, below the 3 anchor where references are present but weakly signaled. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |