The Proctor's reporting guideline for implementation strategies represents a landmark framework in the field of implementation science, aiming to address the issue of inconsistent reporting in implementation research by standardizing the naming, definition, and operationalization of implementation strategies, thereby enhancing the credibility and utility of research findings. This paper provides an in-depth interpretation of the core connotations of this reporting guideline and illustrates its application in developing interview outlines and specifying implementation strategies, using a brief smoking cessation intervention project as a case study. Through this reporting guideline, abstract recommendations for implementation are systematically transformed into clear, multidimensional operational guides, significantly improving the transparency of strategy connotations and the replicability of actual execution. Meanwhile, the case study highlights the flexibility of the guideline, which allows researchers to adapt the content and format of strategies based on local resources and cultural contexts, thus enhancing practical adaptability while maintaining scientific rigor. However, the application of Proctor's reporting guideline still faces challenges, primarily manifested in the potential confusion surrounding the constructs of temporality and dose in practice, as well as the challenges that the inherent flexibility of the guideline may pose to the assessment of fidelity and effectiveness. Despite these limitations, the reporting guideline remains a vital tool for implementation research; future efforts should focus on optimizing its application—through refining operational guidelines, standardizing flexible adaptations, and involving stakeholders—to better guide implementation studies and continuously promote high-quality development in the field.