Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a lean, actionable instruction set with clear branching workflows, user-confirmation checkpoints, and concrete good/bad writing examples. Its main weakness is progressive disclosure: it points to reference/templates.md, but that bundle file does not exist, leaving the reference broken.
Suggestions
Add the missing reference/templates.md file (or correct the path) so the referenced templates link resolves; a broken one-level reference currently caps progressive_disclosure at 2.
Consolidate the overlapping preservation rules between 四、有草稿流程 step 3 and 五、通用原则 (both restate 'do not modify image paths' and 'preserve tables/data verbatim') to remove redundancy.
Add an explicit output self-check step that re-验证s the result against 六、写作质量标准 before returning, turning the quality standards into a true validation checkpoint in the workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — task-identification tables, short numbered flows, and concrete do/don't examples — and does not explain concepts Claude already knows (e.g., no 'what is a weekly report' padding), so every section earns its place; it is not the level-2 case that includes unnecessary explanation. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Gives executable, specific guidance: named tool usage ('WebSearch'), explicit preservation rules ('图片引用  路径不可修改,原样保留'), and concrete good/bad examples (the 🚫 '完成了模型测试' vs 👍 '完成 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B-AWQ …错题率降至 1/18…' pair); as an instruction-only skill the absence of code is not penalized because guidance is actionable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequence: task identification → draft/no-draft branch → numbered flows → output, with explicit user-input checkpoints ('先询问用户选择周报类型', '确认信息') and a quality checklist (六、写作质量标准); the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply to a generation task, so this stays above level 2. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized into clear sections and signals a one-level-deep reference to [reference/templates.md](reference/templates.md), but that referenced file is not present in the bundle (no reference/ or references/ directory exists), so the navigation to the detail material is broken — better than level 1's monolithic wall of text but not the clean, navigable structure of level 3. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |