Content
83%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 concise and highly actionable with complete JSON examples for every action, but it lacks validation/verification guidance for its destructive (delete) and batch-capable operations.
Suggestions
Add a verification step before destructive actions, e.g. confirm the messageId/channelId and note that deleteMessage is irreversible.
For readMessages or batch scenarios, add a checkpoint to verify fetched results before acting on them.
Optionally surface a short 'before you delete' note in the deleteMessage example to satisfy the validation-checkpoint requirement.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient: a one-sentence overview, a tight inputs list, and compact per-action JSON examples with no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; nearly every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Every action ships a copy-paste-ready JSON payload (react, reactions, sendMessage, editMessage, deleteMessage, readMessages, pin/unpin/listPins, memberInfo, emojiList) covering the common cases concretely. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Per-action recipes are unambiguous, but the skill includes destructive operations (deleteMessage) with no validation/verification checkpoint, which the rubric caps at 3 regardless of simplicity. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Single self-contained file with clean sectioning (Overview, Inputs, Actions, Ideas) and no nested references; well-organized, though no one-level-deep references exist to push it to the top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |