Content
76%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 highly actionable and well-structured, with copy-paste commands covering common flows and a clean parameter reference. Its main gap is workflow safety: the interactive, potentially destructive operations lack explicit validation checkpoints, which caps workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add explicit validation checkpoints to the See->click->type flow — e.g., after `see --annotate`, verify the printed element ID matches the intended target before clicking, and after `type`/`click` confirm the expected UI state changed.
Embed a permissions preflight as the first checkpoint of the happy path (run `peekaboo permissions` and stop if Screen Recording/Accessibility are not granted) rather than only mentioning it in Notes.
Trim the intro paragraph that re-summarizes the description, and consider moving the long flat command catalog into a short grouped overview so the body leads with the workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a dense, reference-style catalog of one-line command descriptions plus copy-paste example blocks and parameter tables, mostly avoiding concepts Claude already knows; minor redundancy (the intro re-summarizes the description, and the long flat command list plus "Tip: run via `polter peekaboo`") keeps it just below the every-token-earns-its-place anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands across the common cases (see->click->type, window-id targeting, capture+analyze, menus/dock, mouse/gestures, keyboard) plus concrete common-flag tables, matching the fully-executable-broad-coverage anchor at 5 rather than the minor-gaps anchor at 4. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sequences are present and coherent (Quickstart happy path, the See->click->type flow), but the skill drives real, potentially destructive input (mouse/keyboard, clicking, window/app management) and the workflows lack explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., verify the element ID from `see` before clicking; confirm the expected UI state after an action), so the destructive-operations cap holds at 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the single file is well-organized into clearly headed sections (Features, Quickstart, Common parameters, Examples, Notes) with easy navigation; the long inline command catalog is a mild organization consideration that keeps it at 4 rather than the well-signaled-one-level-deep-references anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |