Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a tight, well-organized instruction skill that avoids padding and structures content cleanly, but its guidance is largely principle-level and its validation lacks an explicit fix-and-retry loop.
Suggestions
Add one short concrete example of applying a shared mixin or declaring an `app-region: no-drag` rule to lift actionability.
Turn the Validation section into a feedback loop: "If lint/tests fail, fix and re-run before proceeding."
Tighten rules into imperative, executable steps where possible (e.g. name the exact lint/test command for the UI project).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line (file paths, rules, validation) earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete file paths and the explicit `app-region: no-drag` detail are actionable, but most guidance is principle-level ("Prefer...", "Do not duplicate...", "Check...") rather than copy-paste-ready instruction. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A validation section is present ("Run lint/tests," inspect in light and dark themes) but there is no error-recovery feedback loop (fail -> fix -> retry), leaving the sequence at the midpoint rather than the explicit-checkpoint anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no bundle files present; the body is well-organized into clear sections (Shared Style Sources, Rules, Validation), which satisfies the simple-skill allowance for a top score. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |