Content
78%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 concise, well-sequenced research-refresh workflow with concrete field requirements and an explicit stale-evidence feedback loop. Its main weakness is mild redundancy between the two closing paragraphs and a few abstract directives that could be made more concrete.
Suggestions
Merge the 'expired refresh_due' and 'Tool unavailability' paragraphs: both state the same demote-and-block decision, so consolidate to remove redundancy and save tokens.
Make 'Propose canonical updates with affected controls, skills, adapters, and tests' more actionable by specifying where/how to record the proposal (e.g., a canonical-update entry format or file).
Add an explicit verification checklist (e.g., 'For each load-bearing claim: verifier confirms source eligibility, recency, and license before promotion') to lift workflow clarity from implicit to enumerated checkpoints.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and efficient, assuming Claude's competence without explaining basic concepts; the 'expired refresh_due' and 'Tool unavailability' paragraphs repeat the demote-and-block message, which could be tightened, keeping it just below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance for an instruction-only skill, including a specific field list to record ('URL, publisher, publication and retrieval dates, supported claims, geography, availability, confidence, license, redistribution status, and refresh date') and explicit worker dispatch; minor gaps like 'Propose canonical updates' remain abstract. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly numbered 1-6 sequence with verification checkpoints (separate source verifier in step 4, demote-unsupported in step 5) and an explicit feedback loop for the stale/unavailable case (demote, record blocker, block dependents, request access); not a 5 because some checkpoints are implicit rather than enumerated as a checklist. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A compact, well-organized single file under 50 lines with no need for external references; the numbered workflow plus thematic paragraphs navigates cleanly, satisfying the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |