Content
86%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 is a tightly written, well-structured routing and ownership guide that assumes competence and uses progressive disclosure effectively, with real reference files and a clear multi-step workflow. Its only meaningful gap is the absence of concrete runnable examples to confirm the boundary and contract shapes it prescribes.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean, dense routing and ownership rules that assume Claude's competence ("Separate model-owned semantic decisions from host-owned validation") with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance including the ModelRequest boundary rules (runtime facts in .input(...), schemas in .info(...), rules in .instruct(...), shape in .output(...)) and explicit routing tables per owner; not a 5 because it is instruction-only with no runnable code samples to confirm shapes. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced 6-step workflow with an explicit checkpoint ("Report a framework gap when no native owner can carry a required invariant"); the skill is routing/analysis rather than destructive/batch so the validation cap does not apply, but there is no error-recovery feedback loop for the few validation-sensitive steps ("For real-model claims, define criteria first..."). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references (multi-round-collaboration.md, task-dag.md, project-framework.md, context-and-skills.md, model-quality-validation.md), all of which resolve to real files, plus a separate full-stack-reference asset; content is appropriately split and easy to navigate. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |