Content
72%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.
Well-structured index skill with excellent progressive disclosure and concrete tooling references. The main gap is workflow clarity: destructive/batch operations (migration, SSOT promotion, merging) lack explicit validation checkpoints in the body's workflow.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation/checkpoint step to the 実行手順 workflow — e.g., confirm scope with the user and re-verify current state before any destructive migration or SSOT promotion, rather than only stating guardrail principles.
De-duplicate the sync-ssot-from-memory.md reference (it appears in both the 機能詳細 table and the SSOT昇格 section) to tighten conciseness.
Tighten or shorten the D22 explanatory paragraph to only what is needed to point to the decision record, keeping the body an index.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a lean index with purposeful guardrail principles, but the D22 paragraph is mildly explanatory and sync-ssot-from-memory.md is referenced twice, leaving minor redundancy to trim. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete MCP tool names (harness_mem_search, harness_mem_record_checkpoint, etc.) and an executable command (/memory ssot), but detailed per-task steps are deferred to reference files, leaving minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A 3-step sequence is present (classify request, read reference file, execute), but validation checkpoints are absent; because migration/promotion/merging are destructive or batch operations, the rubric caps workflow clarity at 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clear overview table points to five one-level-deep reference files, all verified to exist, with easy navigation — a textbook match for the anchor 5 example. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |