Content
82%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 lean, highly actionable skill body: concrete CLI commands, a worked JSON example, and a sequenced workflow with approval and verification checkpoints. The main gaps are minor — a redundant 'When to Use' section, no explicit error-recovery loop after the verification re-run, and an ambiguous closing pointer to '/cubic:review'.
Suggestions
Trim the 'When to Use' section (and the opening line that repeats the title) since the frontmatter description already carries the trigger information, saving tokens without losing clarity.
Close the feedback loop in the Workflow: after step 7 (re-run cubic review to verify), state what to do if issues remain (e.g., 'If issues persist, repeat steps 4-7 or report unresolved issues to the user').
Clarify or remove the closing line 'For the full command reference and step-by-step workflow, use `/cubic:review`' — no such bundle file or command exists in this skill, so the pointer is circular and misleading.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is command-focused with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but the 'When to Use' section and opening line largely duplicate the frontmatter description, matching anchor 4 ('minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed') rather than 5's every-token-earns-its-place. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Copy-paste-ready commands cover all four review modes (`cubic review --json`, `--base main`, `--commit HEAD~1`, `--prompt`), plus install commands, a concrete JSON output sample, and explicit tool assignments (Bash, Read, Edit) — fully executable guidance covering the common cases, matching anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 7-step sequence includes checkpoints (user approval before applying fixes; re-run to verify) and auth-error handling, but lacks an explicit branch for when verification still finds issues, fitting anchor 4 ('clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps') rather than 5's explicit error-recovery feedback loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The short body is well-organized into clear sections (Prerequisites, CLI Quick Reference, JSON Output Format, Workflow), but the closing pointer 'use `/cubic:review`' references a command outside this bundle (no references/scripts/assets files exist) and is near-circular with the skill's own name — a minor navigation gap matching anchor 4. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |