This is a well-structured, highly actionable skill that provides clear step-by-step guidance for state machine validation with concrete commands, detection patterns, and a strict output schema. Its main weakness is moderate verbosity in scope declarations and some redundancy in framing statements. The workflow is excellent with an early-exit detection step and explicit severity categorization for findings.

Suggestions

Trim the scope declaration section — the 'MUST NOT report on' list and 'You do NOT' statements are redundant with each other and could be consolidated into 2-3 lines.

Consider extracting the detailed rule definitions (HARD, SHOULD, WARN) into a separate RULES.md reference file to keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with navigation pointers.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is mostly efficient but has some redundancy. The scope declaration's 'MUST NOT report on' list and the repeated 'You do NOT' statements are somewhat verbose. The 'When reviewing, check' sub-bullets under each rule add useful guidance but could be slightly tighter. Overall reasonable but not maximally lean.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides fully executable bash commands for input gathering, concrete grep patterns for detection, specific rules with clear review checklists, and an exact JSON output schema. Claude knows exactly what to do at every step.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The workflow is clearly sequenced: get changed files → filter → detect relevance (with early exit path and exact output) → apply rules in order → categorize findings → produce structured output. The detection step serves as a validation checkpoint, and the pass/fail logic is explicit with clear severity categorization.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is well-organized with clear sections (Input, Detection, Rules, Output) but is a single monolithic file at ~150 lines. The rules section could potentially be split out for a cleaner overview, though for a skill of this size it's borderline acceptable. No bundle files are provided, and the single 'References (Normative)' section is minimal.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

22%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This description is too terse and vague to effectively guide skill selection. It identifies a narrow domain (state machines and lifecycles) but fails to enumerate specific capabilities or provide explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Without concrete actions and a 'Use when...' clause, it would be difficult for Claude to reliably choose this skill from a large pool.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'state machine', 'FSM', 'state transitions', 'lifecycle hooks', 'unreachable states', 'state diagram'.

List specific concrete actions such as 'detect unreachable states, verify transition completeness, check guard conditions, validate lifecycle hook ordering'.

Include common keyword variations users might say, such as 'FSM', 'finite state machine', 'workflow states', 'state chart', or 'state flow'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names a domain ('state machine and lifecycle') and a single vague action ('validate correctness'), but does not list any concrete actions like checking transitions, detecting unreachable states, or verifying guard conditions.	1 / 3
Completeness	The description only partially addresses 'what' (validate correctness) and completely lacks a 'when should Claude use it' clause. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the weak 'what' brings it to 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes some relevant terms like 'state machine' and 'lifecycle' that users might mention, but misses common variations such as 'FSM', 'finite state machine', 'state transitions', 'state diagram', or 'workflow validation'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The mention of 'state machine and lifecycle' provides some specificity, but 'validate correctness' is generic enough that it could overlap with general code validation, testing, or formal verification skills.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Validation

81%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 9 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	9 / 11 Passed

Reviewed

20 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation