Content
62%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 skill's greatest strength is its workflow: a fully specified multi-stage pipeline with strict review scoring, an acceptance gate, and a bounded refinement loop, backed by largely copy-paste-ready scripts. It is undermined by heavy redundancy — style and arrow rules restated four times in two languages — and by a monolithic structure that inlines templates which should live in reference files.
Suggestions
Deduplicate the CVPR style/arrow/color guidance: state it once in the Step 1 prompt template (which is already sent to Gemini) and drop the separate 'CVPR/ICLR/NeurIPS Top-Tier Conference Style Guide' section and repeated 'Key Rules' items to cut the body by roughly half.
Move the Step 1 prompt template and the Step 5 strict-review checklist into references/ files (e.g. references/prompt-template.md, references/review-checklist.md) and link to them, keeping SKILL.md as a concise workflow overview.
Close the actionability gaps: actually create figure_final.png, latex_include.tex, and review_log.json in the Step 4/Step 8 scripts, and parameterize the iteration counter instead of hard-coding 'iteration = 1'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~700-line body is noticeably verbose: the CVPR style/arrow/color guidance is restated four times (style guide, prompt template, Step 3 request, Step 5 checklist), the 'Key Rules' section repeats checklist items again, and bilingual Chinese/English lines duplicate the same instruction. It does not explain concepts Claude already knows, so not a 1, but the padding is substantial. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Mostly executable: complete bash scripts with real curl calls, Python JSON-payload builders, base64 image extraction, and error checks. Minor gaps remain — INITIAL_PROMPT is a placeholder, the image iteration counter is hard-coded to 'iteration = 1 # Claude increments this each iteration', and figure_final.png/latex_include.tex/review_log.json in the output structure are described but never created by any script. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The eight-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: pre-flight API-key check, a mandatory strict review with a per-arrow/per-block checklist, a score ≥ 9 gate, a decision point with a refine loop back to Step 2, MAX_ITERATIONS bound, and targeted improvement-prompt generation. Textbook feedback-loop structure. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section headers are clear, but the skill is a monolithic 700-line file with no bundle files — the style guide, prompt template, and review-checklist template clearly belong in separate reference files. Referenced paths (tools/extract_paper_style.py, shared-references/integration-contract.md, /overleaf-sync) are external to this bundle and only loosely signaled. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |