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.
The content is concise and well-structured with proper progressive disclosure to a real reference file, but the workflow and tool guidance stay at the task-outline level without executable commands or explicit validation feedback loops.
Suggestions
Add concrete executable commands to the tool table (e.g., 'dig TXT example.com' / 'nslookup -type=txt' and a urlscan.io invocation) instead of tool names alone.
Insert an explicit validation checkpoint in the workflow (e.g., 'verify Received-chain integrity before proceeding to auth alignment') with a fix-and-retry loop.
Expand the self-check into inline pass/fail gates tied to each workflow step rather than a single end-of-task list.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — short checklists, a compact tool table, and a one-line routing context — with no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; nearly every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It names concrete checks ('完整原始头', 'SPF/DKIM/DMARC 对齐结果') and tools (dig/nslookup, urlscan) but stops short of executable commands or specific syntax, leaving the operator to fill in details. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'ACT' arrow ('头认证 → 内容/URL → 附件沙箱 → 租户控制面建议') gives a clear sequence and a closing self-check exists, but validation checkpoints are implicit and there is no validate→fix→retry feedback loop. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized into labeled sections and points to a real, one-level-deep reference (references/email-auth-checklist.md) under a clearly signaled 参考 section, with sibling-skill routing hints kept separate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |