Content
77%Reviews 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 a well-sequenced, validated multi-stage workflow, but it is held back by heavy repetition of the same style guidance and a monolithic structure that should be split into reference files. Tightening redundancy and externalizing large blocks would meaningfully improve it.
Suggestions
De-duplicate the visual-style guidance (科研风格 / color palette / avoid-list): state it once in a dedicated section and reference it from the prompt template, Step 3, and the Step 5 checklist instead of repeating the full text four times.
Split the large prompt template, the CVPR/NeurIPS style guide, and the STRICT review checklist into separate reference files (e.g. references/prompt-template.md, references/style-guide.md, references/review-checklist.md) and link to them from SKILL.md to enable progressive disclosure.
Reduce bilingual redundancy by consolidating each guideline into a single language with the other inline only where a term genuinely differs, and trim the large ASCII workflow diagram to a compact summary now that the step list below it conveys the same sequence.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is ~730 lines with the same visual-style guidance (科研风格, color palette, rounded corners, avoid-list) repeated four times — in the style guide, the prompt template, Step 3, and the Step 5 checklist — plus bilingual doubling and a large ASCII diagram. It avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the repetition is significant padding that could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash/curl/python blocks with real Gemini endpoints, JSON payload construction, image decoding, and concrete file paths — copy-paste ready rather than pseudocode. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 0–8 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints — a pre-flight API-key check, a mandatory STRICT review with a 1–10 score, a decision point, and a refine→re-run feedback loop — matching the anchor-3 validate-fix-retry pattern. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the skill is a single monolithic ~730-line file; large blocks that belong in separate references (the prompt template, the style guide, the review checklist) are inline, and external file references (shared-references/integration-contract.md, tools/extract_paper_style.py) are buried in code comments rather than signaled as navigation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |