Content
60%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 body is a well-sequenced, lean, mostly actionable instruction set for an instruction-only skill, with clear phase gating and concrete commands. Its two real defects are a dangling reference to HTML-REPORT.md that leaves the report-building step (the core deliverable) without its promised template, and the absence of any verification that the report was written and opened. Adding the missing reference file would lift both actionability and progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Create the referenced HTML-REPORT.md (e.g. in references/) with the promised HTML scaffold, Mermaid diagram patterns, and styling guidance, or inline a minimal template if the file is intentionally omitted.
Add a verification checkpoint after writing the report (confirm the file exists at the absolute path and handle xdg-open/open failure), giving the workflow an explicit feedback loop.
Tighten the Tailwind/Mermaid paragraph — the mixing rule (graph-shaped → Mermaid, editorial → hand-drawn) can be stated in one line instead of two.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and prescriptive, assumes competence ("自然探索，并记录你感到 friction 的地方"), and delegates detail to HTML-REPORT.md rather than padding. Minor wordiness in the Tailwind/Mermaid paragraph and small editorial asides ("要视觉化") keep it below the every-token-earns-its-place level of 5, but it is clearly efficient rather than merely "mostly efficient". | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance is strong in places: exact commands ("git log --oneline", "xdg-open <path>" / "open <path>" / "start <path>"), exact file pattern "<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html", exact Skill invocations (codebase-design, grilling, domain-modeling), and a copy-ready user prompt. However the central deliverable — the HTML report — defers "完整 HTML scaffold、diagram patterns 和 styling guidance" to HTML-REPORT.md, which does not exist in the bundle, leaving key details missing. Not 4 because that gap is in the workflow's primary artifact. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-phase sequence (探索 → 报告 → grilling 循环) with explicit decision points: skip-inference when the user names a direction, ADR-conflict gating, and a hard checkpoint ("写完文件后问用户") before grilling. No destructive or batch operations, so the validation cap does not apply. Not 5 because there is no verification step that the report file was written and opened successfully, and no error-recovery loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Scored against the actual bundle structure per the guidelines: the bundle contains no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories, and the body's sole bundle reference — [HTML-REPORT.md](HTML-REPORT.md) carrying the complete HTML scaffold, diagram patterns, and styling guidance — is dangling, so the promised detail exists nowhere. The reference is clearly signaled and the body sections are well organized, so it is above the monolithic anchor 1, but the navigation dead-ends on the skill's most detail-heavy step. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |