Content
67%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 well-structured, workflow-driven skill body with clear steps, a user-confirmation checkpoint, and a final quality checklist; concrete commands and file layouts cover most of the pipeline. Main weaknesses are repetitive guardrail restatements that pad the token budget, and abstract pointers ("per skill-creator", "existing skills in this repo") where inline mini-examples would make the output spec self-contained.
Suggestions
State the no-install/write-to-review-dir guardrail once (in the guardrails section) and remove the duplicates in Step 3, Step 5, and the checklist, replacing them with a single cross-reference.
Include a short inline example of a "pushy" generated description and a compact reasoning-guide skeleton in Step 2, so the skill does not depend on reading skill-creator or existing skills to know what to write.
Make output validation a required step (e.g. run `quick_validate.py` in Step 3 or the checklist) instead of an optional Step 4 for polished artifacts.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient imperative prose, but the never-install guardrail is repeated four times ("Never write into `.skills/`" in the guardrails section, the Step 3 tree note, Step 5's "Do not write to `.skills/`", and the checklist), and the `_generated-skills/` vs `skills/` explanatory note is padded. Fits "mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened" better than the minor-trim anchor at 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete executable elements are present: `qmd query "<topic>" -c "$QMD_WIKI_COLLECTION" --files`, explicit skill-creator script paths with fallback layouts, the output directory tree, and the install symlink command. Not 5 because key design guidance stays abstract ("Write it 'pushy' (per skill-creator)", "Follow the structure of existing skills in this repo") with no inline example of a generated description or reasoning guide; not 3 because the commands, paths, and layout cover most of the workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 0–5 are clearly sequenced with an explicit user checkpoint ("Confirm the cluster with the user (list page names + count) before generating") and a final quality checklist. Not 5 because output validation (`quick_validate.py`) is framed as optional ("Use them when the user wants a polished/validated artifact") rather than a required checkpoint in the flow; not 3 because sequence and checkpoints are otherwise well defined and the operation is non-destructive (writes only to a new review dir). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure: a lean body that pushes depth into the generated references/, an explicit output-bundle tree, and clearly named external resources (`llm-wiki/SKILL.md`, skill-creator scripts with resolved paths). Not 5 because the body depends on external material not in this bundle and there is no bundled reference file; not 3 because references are clearly signaled with concrete paths and the content split (lean SKILL.md vs references/) is appropriate. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |