mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-05 01:50:27 +08:00
a62bbd6a7f
Changes: - Simplify 02-analyze-technical-document.txt to match other template formats - Reduce from 280 lines to 33 lines with concise checklist structure - Update intelligent-tools-strategy.md to include document analysis - Add document-analysis to Quick Decision Matrix and Task-Template Matrix Template now follows standard format: - Brief description + CORE CHECKLIST + REQUIRED ANALYSIS - OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS + VERIFICATION CHECKLIST + Focus statement - Maintains all key requirements: pre-planning, evidence-based, self-critique
34 lines
1.6 KiB
Plaintext
34 lines
1.6 KiB
Plaintext
Analyze technical documents, research papers, and specifications systematically.
|
|
|
|
## CORE CHECKLIST ⚡
|
|
□ Plan analysis approach before reading (document type, key questions, success criteria)
|
|
□ Provide section/page references for all claims and findings
|
|
□ Distinguish facts from interpretations explicitly
|
|
□ Use precise, direct language - avoid persuasive wording
|
|
□ Apply RULES template requirements exactly as specified
|
|
|
|
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS
|
|
1. Document assessment: type, structure, audience, quality indicators
|
|
2. Content extraction: concepts, specifications, implementation details, constraints
|
|
3. Critical evaluation: strengths, gaps, ambiguities, clarity issues
|
|
4. Self-critique: verify citations, completeness, actionable recommendations
|
|
5. Synthesis: key takeaways, integration points, follow-up questions
|
|
|
|
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS
|
|
- Structured analysis with mandatory section/page references
|
|
- Evidence-based findings with specific location citations
|
|
- Clear separation of facts vs. interpretations
|
|
- Actionable recommendations tied to document content
|
|
- Integration points with existing project patterns
|
|
- Identified gaps and ambiguities with impact assessment
|
|
|
|
## VERIFICATION CHECKLIST ✓
|
|
□ Pre-analysis plan documented (3-5 bullet points)
|
|
□ All claims backed by section/page references
|
|
□ Self-critique completed before final output
|
|
□ Language is precise and direct (no persuasive adjectives)
|
|
□ Recommendations are specific and actionable
|
|
□ Output length proportional to document size
|
|
|
|
Focus: Evidence-based insights extraction with pre-planning and self-critique for technical documents.
|