Content
72%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A concise, well-organized framework that sets clear research standards, collection targets, an output structure, and a pre-delivery quality gate. It is weaker on actionability (no worked examples) and workflow clarity (no explicit error-recovery loop).
Suggestions
Add one concrete worked example for the hardest mode — e.g., a short top-down + bottom-up TAM calculation showing the explicit assumptions — to lift actionability from framework-level to copy-paste-ready.
Turn the 质量门禁 into an explicit validate→fix→re-validate loop: state that if any gate item fails, the report must be corrected and re-checked before delivery, so the feedback loop is not just implied.
Reframe 调研标准 items 4–5 ('将发现转化为决策建议', '明确区分事实、推断和建议') as concrete output signals (e.g., a labeled 'Recommendations' subsection with evidence citations) instead of abstract directives.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean bullet/numbered lists with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows ('产出支持决策的研究报告，而非流于形式的研究'), assuming Claude's research competence — every token earns its place rather than the 2-level 'could be tightened' anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete collection lists ('基金规模、阶段和典型支票额度', '产品现状，而非营销文案'), a numbered output format, and a quality-gate checklist provide real guidance, but it lacks worked examples (e.g., a sample TAM calculation or dossier) and mixes in abstract directives ('将发现转化为决策建议'), so it stops short of fully copy-paste-ready guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The '质量门禁' checklist is an explicit pre-delivery validation checkpoint, but the overall flow is a standards/framework layout rather than a tightly sequenced end-to-end workflow, and there is no explicit validate→fix→re-validate error-recovery loop, leaving it at the 'sequence present but checkpoints implicit' level rather than 3. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single self-contained file (~70 lines) with clear section headers (何时激活, 调研标准, 常用调研模式, 输出格式, 质量门禁), no nested references and no content that needs splitting out — easy navigation per the simple-skill scoring note. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |