Content
75%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 strong, actionable workflow with concrete templates, commands, file paths, and a clear two-mode sequence plus validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are non-essential motivational/rationale padding that hurts conciseness and a description that under-sells the skill.
Suggestions
Trim the motivational quotes and the '设计理念' narrative to a one-line rationale; keep the templates and process which carry the value.
Consider moving the assumption/red-line/valuation table templates into a references/ template file linked from the body, which would improve both conciseness and progressive_disclosure for this 200+ line skill.
Add an explicit validate→fix→retry note around the verify-valuation step in A0 (e.g. 'if validation fails, correct the inputs and re-run before proceeding') to push workflow_clarity toward 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The templates, tables, and process steps earn their tokens, but the motivational quotes (李录/凯恩斯/段永平), the '设计理念' rationale, and the Codex adapter note are explanation Claude does not need, fitting 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'; it is not 4 because the padding is more than minor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully executable: concrete file paths (reports/{公司名}-thesis.md), a real command (tools/financial_rigor.py verify-valuation), a 5-question thesis template, assumption/red-line/valuation tables, and an explicit health-score formula cover the common cases copy-paste ready. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The two-mode flow (A0–A5 build, B1–B7 track) is clearly sequenced with checkpoints (A0 valuation validation, B3 per-assumption checks, B4 red-line checks) and a red-line→action rule; it stops at 4 because there is no hard validate→fix→retry gate of the kind the anchor-5 example shows. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, and the content is cohesive templates organized into clear sections (设计理念, 执行流程, 模式A/B, 关键原则) with no need for external references, giving good single-file structure; it is not 5 because the file is well over 50 lines and some template material could plausibly live in a reference. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |