Content
85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with a well-sequenced workflow, explicit validation checkpoints, and clean one-level reference structure. Its only weakness is conciseness: rationale prose is duplicated between the body and the workflow reference.
Suggestions
Remove the 'two phases use separate agent invocations to prevent rubber-stamping' rationale paragraph from the SKILL.md body since the same rationale already lives in references/prfaq-workflow.md's 'Rationale for Separate Invocations' section; keep only the operational requirement in the body.
Consolidate the duplicated draft/critique quality-check and retry criteria that appear in both the body and prfaq-workflow.md so each lives in one place, with the body briefly pointing to the reference for full criteria.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient but re-explains rationale ('A critic who remembers being the drafter unconsciously defends what it wrote. Separate invocations force genuine adversarial evaluation.') that is duplicated in prfaq-workflow.md's 'Rationale for Separate Invocations' section, so it could be tightened rather than reaching the lean top anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready guidance — exact context-block delimiters ('--- PRODUCT CONCEPT ---'), quoted retry prompts, word-count targets (400-600), concrete quality-check criteria, and AskUserQuestion option lists — fully executable rather than the pseudocode/vague mid-anchors. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1-6 are clearly sequenced with explicit quality-check checkpoints after the draft (Step 3) and critique (Step 4), retry feedback loops, and a dedicated Error Handling section, matching the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps' top anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The overview body signals two real one-level-deep references (prfaq-workflow.md and prfaq-report-template.md, both verified present) with clear Read paths and no deep nesting, matching the 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references' top anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |