Content
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is a tight, actionable workflow with concrete commands, a ready-to-use subagent prompt, clear sequencing, and validation checkpoints. It is well-organized and respects Claude's intelligence without unnecessary explanation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it does not explain basic concepts, and every section (steps, subagent prompt template, verdict table) earns its place without padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It provides concrete, executable guidance — specific commands like `git diff` and `make quality`, a fully copy-paste-ready subagent prompt template, and a verdict-to-action table with clear next steps. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 1–5 step sequence is clearly ordered with explicit validation checkpoints (`make quality`), a verdict-table feedback loop that gates committing, and an embedded review checklist for the subagent. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the skill is appropriately self-contained; it is well-organized into clearly labeled sections (Steps, Subagent Launch, After Commit) with no nested or multi-level references to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |