Content
63%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.
The body delivers a genuinely actionable, well-sequenced documentation-capture process with strong templates and decision rules, but it is inflated by triplicated classification tables and motivational sections, and it inlines bulk template content that belongs in a separate reference file. It reads as a solid skill that would be markedly better after a deduplication pass and a file split.
Suggestions
Deduplicate the update-type classification: merge the "When to Update Code-Specs" trigger table, the "Step 2: Classify the Update Type" table, and the "Interactive Mode" prompts into a single classification section, since all three cover the same categories (design decision, convention, pattern, mistake, gotcha).
Move the ~125 lines of update templates into a references/templates.md file and keep a one-line pointer per template type in SKILL.md, so the main file stays a lean overview (this also removes the duplicated seven-section list from the "Mandatory Template").
Add one filled-in example of a completed infra/cross-layer spec update (all seven mandatory sections populated) so the "Fully executable" bar for actionability is met, and delete the "Core Philosophy" and "Relationship to Other Commands" sections, which add no actionable content.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly dense tables and templates rather than padded prose, but the same content is restated repeatedly: the update-type/trigger classification appears in three places ("When to Update Code-Specs", "Step 2: Classify the Update Type", "Interactive Mode"), the seven mandatory sections appear in both "Code-Spec First Rule" and the "Mandatory Template", and "Core Philosophy" plus "Relationship to Other Commands" add motivational padding. It could be tightened to roughly half its length, which keeps it at anchor 3 rather than rewarding it as lean. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill the guidance is mostly executable: a 5-step process, concrete paths (.trellis/spec/backend/index.md), a runnable command (`cat .trellis/spec/<category>/<file>.md`), copy-paste-ready markdown templates for each update type, and a worked wrong-vs-correct placement example. It stops short of anchor 5 because the mandatory infra template is an empty skeleton with no filled-in end-to-end example showing a completed spec update. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | "Update Process" gives a clear 5-step sequence (identify, classify, read target, update, update index) capped by a 10-item Quality Checklist as an explicit final checkpoint. Checkpoints are end-loaded with no per-step verification or fix-and-retry loop (e.g., re-checking after the checklist fails), which keeps it at anchor 4 rather than the feedback-loop richness of anchor 5; spec edits are not batch/destructive enough to trigger the cap at 3. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill has no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist) and at ~330 lines exceeds the simple-skill exception, so everything is inlined. Section headers are well-organized and easy to navigate, but roughly 125 lines of update templates ("Update Templates" section) clearly belong in a one-level-deep references file while SKILL.md stays an overview, matching anchor 3's "content that should be separate is inline" rather than anchor 4's "most content is appropriately placed". | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |