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 a well-structured, highly actionable multi-agent workflow with concrete commands, templates, and an explicit validation exit-gate. Its main weakness is monolithic inline content with no progressive disclosure via reference files, plus minor verbosity in the framing sections.
Suggestions
Split per-agent prompts (Agents 1–6) and output templates into reference files referenced one level deep from SKILL.md to reduce the monolithic body.
Trim the '设计理念' preamble and repeated role restatements/motivational quotes to tighten token efficiency.
Keep the strong 准出/打回 feedback loop but consider adding an explicit per-agent validation step before the Team Lead synthesis checkpoint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is largely efficient with concrete tables, agent prompts, and commands, but pads with a design-philosophy preamble and restated roles/motivational quotes that could be trimmed. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete executable bash commands (financial_rigor.py cross-validate/verify-valuation, report_audit.py), named agents with specific tasks, exact output templates, and input-format examples make the guidance copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-stage sequence (研究→合成→发布) with numbered steps, a progress-tracking template, and an explicit validation exit-gate (准出/打回 feedback loop) provides strong checkpoints for error recovery. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the ~460-line body is a single monolithic document with everything inline; well-sectioned, but per-agent prompts and output templates would be better split into reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |