Content
71%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 well-structured, high-signal design skill with a clear sequenced methodology, concrete state and evidence models, and an explicit completion gate. Its main defects are the broken F292 case-study reference (no refs/ file exists in the bundle) and inline material that would be better split into one-level-deep reference files.
Suggestions
Add the missing refs/f292-case-study.md (or fix the link to wherever the F292 evidence actually lives) so the cited case study backing the skill's boundary rules is actually reachable.
Move the Common Mistakes table and the 和其他 Skill 的区别 comparison into a one-level-deep reference file, keeping a short summary and clearly signaled links in SKILL.md.
Add fill-in templates for the abstract steps (e.g., a Before/After worksheet with the three freeze items) so every section yields a directly producible artifact.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with project-specific boundary knowledge (authority table, five-state lifecycle model, claim-to-evidence mapping) that Claude cannot know, and tables keep it tight; minor trimming is possible in the opening philosophy ("插件'装上了'不是终态...") and the 为什么这是一个 Skill section, which partly restates the description. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only design skill it gives concrete artifacts to produce (Before/After template, the installed/config/auth/intent/live state model with named states, the roles table, per-claim evidence table, completion checklist) and specific rules ("安装与 API boot 默认不得偷偷启动外部进程", "enable 前实时验证 auth"); minor gaps exist in that some direction stays abstract ("先冻结被删掉的人类劳动") without a fill-in template. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sections 1-7 form a clear design sequence (journey -> authority map -> lifecycle -> auth/recovery -> attention -> release -> evidence) with an explicit 完成门 checklist and per-claim completion evidence acting as validation checkpoints; not a 5 because checkpoints are terminal rather than per-step with feedback loops, and intermediate validation is implicit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section structure is good, but the bundle contains only SKILL.md and the single reference [F292 case study](refs/f292-case-study.md) points to a nonexistent refs/f292-case-study.md path, leaving the cited evidence inaccessible; substantial material (Common Mistakes table, skill-comparison table) that could live in reference files is inlined. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |