Content
75%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 dense, expert-level rulebook with executable TypeScript patterns, a clear three-step migration sequence, and an explicit self-audit checklist plus safety rules for screenshot goldens. Main weaknesses are run-on bullets that bury several rules each and code examples with placeholder ellipses rather than complete snippets.
Suggestions
Split the multi-rule WrapperWidget and ViewOutput bullets into short, individually scannable rules (or move the extended rationale into a reference file) to tighten token efficiency.
Complete the DEFAULT_VIEW and widget() code examples instead of 'html`...`' placeholders so they are copy-paste ready.
Add the concrete build/test commands behind the 'Does the code compile and do tests pass?' audit question to make the validation checkpoint executable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Nearly all content is project-specific rule-making (e.g., 'Never instantiate a child widget... in the presenter', 'Preserve existing standalone/module-level DOM helper functions') with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Not 5 because several bullets (the WrapperWidget and ViewOutput rules) are long run-on walls mixing multiple rules that could be tightened or split. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete TypeScript examples are given for DEFAULT_VIEW, the INJECT-based constructor, performUpdate(), and the widget() directive ('html`${widget(MyWidgetClass, {params})}`'). Not 5 because some examples contain '...' placeholders (the DEFAULT_VIEW body) and fragments rather than fully copy-paste-ready code; not 3 because the guidance is overwhelmingly executable rather than pseudocode. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-step sequence (inheritance change, view delegate upgrade, wrapper cleanup) plus a 'Mental Audit' checklist ('Does the code compile and do tests pass?') and an error-recovery cue ('Look at the screenshot diffs to debug'). Not 5 because validation checkpoints are stated as self-audit questions without concrete build/test commands or an explicit validate-fix-retry loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with a clearly signaled one-level reference ('Follow the rules defined in [`devtools-ui-widgets`](../ui-widgets/SKILL.md)') and no nested reference chains; no bundle files exist to verify further. Not 5 because dense multi-rule bullets are inlined in SKILL.md where separate reference files would ease navigation, and a mention of 'docs/uiengineering.md' is not a clearly signaled link. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |