CZON

Guide to Objective Critical Style Analysis Reports

Prompt Engineering

👤 Readers who wish to deeply evaluate content value, potential collaborators, content creators themselves
This document is a detailed guide on how to write objective critical style analysis reports. It defines the reading focus points, knowledge base structure, compression strategies, style positioning, core principles, required chapter structure, critical framework templates, and quality checklists for analysis reports. The core value lies in guiding users to conduct constructive criticism based on facts, balance strengths and weaknesses analysis, and promote content improvement. The document emphasizes a professional, well-reasoned tone, targeting readers who wish to deeply evaluate content value, potential collaborators, and content creators themselves.
  • ✨ Define the core principles and style positioning of objective critical analysis
  • ✨ Provide the required report chapter structure and critical framework templates
  • ✨ Emphasize constructive criticism based on facts and balanced analysis of strengths and weaknesses
  • ✨ Include knowledge base structure and compression strategies to support information extraction
  • ✨ Set quality checklists to ensure the professionalism and effectiveness of reports
314 words · ~2 min read
  • Critical Analysis
  • Document Analysis
  • Report Writing
  • Objective Evaluation
  • Constructive Feedback
  • Knowledge Base Structure
  • Quality Check

Table of Contents

Objective Critical Style Analysis ReportReading Focus PointsKnowledge Base StructureCompression StrategyStyle PositioningCore PrinciplesRequired Section StructureOverviewArchitecture Design AssessmentInvestment / Strategy AnalysisTechnical Practice AssessmentTheoretical Framework AssessmentComprehensive Constructive SuggestionsCritical Framework TemplateQuality Checklist

Objective Critical Style Analysis Report

Reading Focus Points

When reading each file, focus on extracting:

  • File path and title
  • Proposed viewpoints, claims, and solutions
  • Argumentation process and supporting evidence
  • Assumptions and premises
  • Potential logical flaws or contradictions
  • Practical verification status
  • Consistency/contradictions with other files

Pay Special Attention To: Assertive statements, causal reasoning, data citations, underlying assumptions.

Knowledge Base Structure

### File Index
| File Path | Title | Main Claims |
|-----------|-------|-------------|

### Claims & Arguments Index
| Claim | Supporting Evidence | Strength Assessment | Source File |
|-------|---------------------|---------------------|-------------|

### Assumptions Index
| Assumption | Reasonableness | Related Claims | Source File |
|------------|----------------|----------------|-------------|

### Potential Issues Index
| Issue Type | Description | Impact Scope | Source File |
|------------|-------------|--------------|-------------|

### Supporting Evidence Index
| Strength | Evidence | Source File |
|----------|----------|-------------|

### Contradictions / Inconsistencies Log
| Content A | Content B | Description of Contradiction | Source File |
|-----------|-----------|-----------------------------|-------------|

Compression Strategy

When compressing the knowledge base is necessary:

  1. Must Retain: File Index, Claims & Arguments Index, Potential Issues Index
  2. Can Be Streamlined: Assumptions Index (retain key assumptions), Supporting Evidence Index (retain typical cases)
  3. Can Be Discarded: Detailed descriptions of minor issues

Style Positioning

Based on facts, conduct an objective critical analysis of the content, pointing out its strengths and weaknesses.

Target Audience: Readers seeking an in-depth evaluation of content value, potential collaborators, the content creators themselves. Writing Tone: Professional, constructive, well-reasoned. Purpose: To help readers understand the content more comprehensively, identify strengths and weaknesses, and promote improvement.

Core Principles

  • ✅ Criticism is based on factual evidence, not subjective conjecture.
  • ✅ Criticism is constructive, offering suggestions for improvement.
  • ✅ Acknowledge strengths while pointing out shortcomings.
  • ❌ It is not about negation or disparagement.
  • ❌ No personal attacks.

Required Section Structure

Overview

Briefly introduce the analysis subject and scope.

Architecture Design Assessment

  • Feasibility Analysis
  • Verification Adequacy
  • Practical Implementation Status
  • Improvement Suggestions

Investment / Strategy Analysis

  • Logical Consistency Check
  • Examination of Assumptions
  • Risk Identification
  • Improvement Suggestions

Technical Practice Assessment

  • Reasonableness of Technology Selection
  • Implementation Quality
  • Maintainability
  • Improvement Suggestions

Theoretical Framework Assessment

  • Methodological Rigor
  • Applicability Scope
  • Limitations
  • Improvement Suggestions

Comprehensive Constructive Suggestions

List improvement suggestions by priority:

  1. High-Priority Suggestions
  2. Medium-Priority Suggestions
  3. Long-Term Suggestions

Critical Framework Template

### [Assessment Area]

**Current State Description**:
[Objectively describe the current state, citing specific files]

**Strengths**:

-   Strength 1 (Evidence: [Link])
-   Strength 2 (Evidence: [Link])

**Shortcomings**:

-   Shortcoming 1 (Evidence: [Link])
    -   Specific problem description
    -   Potential impact
-   Shortcoming 2 (Evidence: [Link])

**Improvement Suggestions**:

1.  Suggestion 1: Specific, actionable improvement plan.
2.  Suggestion 2: Specific, actionable improvement plan.

Quality Checklist

  • Each criticism point has factual evidence.
  • Each criticism point has an improvement suggestion.
  • Tone is professional, with no personal attacks.
  • Strengths and weaknesses analysis is balanced.
  • All links are valid.

See Also