Content
63%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.
A strong operational routing body with concrete commands, MCP IDs, and a clear pre-flight + routing workflow. It is held back by repeated framing across sections and by refs/*.md references that do not exist in the provided bundle.
Suggestions
Consolidate the "do you really need a browser?" framing so it appears once (e.g., in 默认路由顺序 step 1) instead of being repeated in 执行前四问, 什么时候用, and 默认路由顺序.
Merge 和其他 skill 的区别 into 不要用在这里 to remove the duplicated boundary information and tighten the body.
Ship the referenced refs/playwright-mcp.md, refs/playwriter.md, refs/agent-browser.md, and refs/pinchtab.md files (or remove the references) so the progressive-disclosure navigation resolves to real content.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient operational content, but the "真的需要浏览器吗" prompt is repeated across 执行前四问, 什么时候用, and 默认路由顺序, and 和其他 skill 的区别 restates 不要用在这里 — more than minor redundancy. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete executable guidance for an instruction-only skill: specific MCP IDs (playwright, claude-in-chrome, pinchtab), tool prefixes (mcp__claude-in-chrome__*), install commands (npm i -g agent-browser, npx @playwright/mcp@latest), and a specific gotcha (pinchtab_eval + window.location.href); bulk detail is deferred to refs. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequenced workflow: 执行前四问 pre-flight checkpoints plus a 7-step 默认路由顺序 with decision branches and a 交付要求 delivery checklist, though no explicit error-recovery feedback loop is present. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Structure is well-signaled with a dedicated 读取哪些 refs table and one-level-deep refs/*.md references, but the referenced ref files (playwright-mcp.md, playwriter.md, agent-browser.md, pinchtab.md) are not present in the bundle, leaving navigation to dead ends. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |