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.
The body is a well-structured orchestration playbook: explicit pass sequencing with trigger-condition checkpoints, a user-acceptance gate, and concrete artifacts (plan template, search globs, verification command). Its main weaknesses are duplicated constraint statements, no explicit error-recovery loop, and a lone external reference whose relative path exits the skill bundle.
Suggestions
Deduplicate the safety constraints: "Strict Intermediate Stability" and the build-must-pass rule appear both in "Critical Constraints & Forbidden Actions" and again as Philosophy items 8 — state them once and cross-reference.
Replace filler directives like "Pay extra attention not to skip this step" with a concrete verification step (e.g., the exact test/screenshot-test command to run and what green output looks like).
Add an explicit error-recovery loop to the lifecycle (e.g., "If tests or lints fail after a pass: stop, report the failure, fix, and re-run before staging the CL") and fix the ui_engineering.md link to a path inside the skill bundle.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient, project-specific guidance with no generic concept padding, but "Strict Intermediate Stability" is stated twice nearly verbatim (Critical Constraints #2 and Philosophy #8), pre-flight clarification appears both as Philosophy #11 and Plan Generation action 1, and filler like "Pay extra attention not to skip this step" adds nothing — matching "Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened". Not 4 because the duplication is recurring rather than a minor instance. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable artifacts throughout: a copy-paste "Structured Plan Template", exact search globs ("front_end/legacy_test_runner/**/*.js"), a verification command ("cog_api.py diff"), named subskills assigned per pass, and concrete example files ("DOMStorageItemsView.ts") — "Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps". Not 5 because key verifications (run tests, run lints) are mandated but no commands/examples are given for them. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Multi-Pass Execution Lifecycle is clearly sequenced with explicit trigger-condition checkpoints ("Baseline tests green", "Pass 0.5 staged", "Previous pass staged", "Both... staged"), a hard user-acceptance gate, a passes checklist, and "stop and report back after each step" — "Clear sequence with most checkpoints present". Not 5 because there is no explicit error-recovery loop (what to do when a pass's tests/lints fail) anywhere in the lifecycle. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A well-sectioned overview that appropriately delegates per-pass detail to named subskills, with one clearly signaled one-level reference ("Refer to ui_engineering.md for general principles") — "Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; references mostly clear". Not 5 because the bundle has no references/ directory, and the single link uses a relative path that exits the skill directory ("../../../docs/ui_engineering.md"), which may not resolve where the skill is installed. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |