Content
88%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 well-structured, actionable validation protocol with explicit steps, checklists, and output templates. It respects token budget and avoids over-explanation, with only minor trim opportunities.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean and assumes Claude's competence, with no padding about basic concepts, but a few framing sentences ('not to be encouraging, but to catch real problems') and the Severity Guide table could be trimmed slightly. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides a concrete parseable input block, explicit check categories (existence/completeness/correctness/convention) with specific failure signatures, and a copy-paste-ready verdict report template plus an overall verdict rule set. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step numbered protocol with an explicit validation checkpoint (Step 1: flag underspecified goals as WARN) and explicit pass/warn/fail aggregation rules forming a feedback loop. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Single self-contained file with no bundle files and clear section headers; well-organized but slightly over the ~50-line simple-skill threshold, so it sits just below the clean 5-anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |