Content
82%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 content is highly actionable with executable commands and a confirmed backing script, a clear workflow, and good progressive disclosure through delegation to analyze.py; the main improvement is light trimming of the Features/Output Structure redundancy.
Suggestions
Trim overlap between the Features list and the Output Structure section so each detail appears once.
Add a brief note on how to handle ticker-lookup failures or ambiguous company names in the workflow's first step.
Consider a short verification hint (e.g. checking that the script printed all 8 report sections) in the Interpret step to make the read-only flow more robust.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is efficient and assumes Claude's competence (no over-explanation of finance concepts, executable commands inline); the Features and Output Structure sections repeat some detail that could be trimmed, keeping it just below fully lean. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready, executable commands (e.g. `python "$SKILLS_ROOT/stock-analyzer/scripts/analyze.py" 601288.SS --period 1y`), a parameter table, ticker format examples, and the referenced analyze.py script is present and real — covering the common cases fully. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 3-step workflow (Identify ticker → Execute analysis → Interpret results) with an explicit web-search fallback for company names; this is a non-destructive single-script invocation so no validation checkpoint is strictly required, leaving only minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a well-organized overview with the heavy logic delegated one level deep to scripts/analyze.py (referenced via $SKILLS_ROOT and confirmed present); sections are clearly labeled and navigation is easy, with only minor organization gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |