Content
72%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 well-structured and highly actionable for orchestration and document landing, but two issues hold it back: the automatic disk-writing workflow lacks validation checkpoints, and the five referenced reference files are missing from the bundle.
Suggestions
Add a validation checkpoint after auto-落盘 (e.g., confirm the file was created/appended and the time-header separator was written correctly), with a fix-and-retry loop for write failures.
Ship the referenced per-stage files (reference/requirement.md, design.md, implementation.md, review.md, bug-fix.md) or inline the per-stage procedures so the skill is self-contained.
Remove or condense the '使用时机' keyword list since the same triggers already appear in the frontmatter description.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean with concrete paths and formats that earn their place, but the '使用时机' keyword list duplicates the frontmatter triggers and could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance throughout — exact file paths (docs/需求理解.md), title format (## YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm), separator (---), and append-not-overwrite rules with clear fallback logic. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-stage sequence and handoffs are clearly laid out, but the core auto-落盘 write behavior has no validation or error-recovery checkpoint, which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the destructive/batch rule. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Structure and one-level-deep references are clearly signaled, but the five referenced reference/*.md files do not exist in the bundle, breaking navigation and leaving the per-stage procedures missing. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |