Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-structured, concise, and actionable with executable code and a clear parameter table. Its main gap is the absence of any validation or verification checkpoint for a destructive batch-rename operation, which caps workflow clarity at 2.
Suggestions
Add a verification/dry-run checkpoint before applying batch renames (e.g. preview the rename mapping or count affected files) and a post-rename confirmation step, since this is a destructive batch operation.
Clarify the 'suffix' parameter's behavior with a concrete example (e.g. suffix='.txt' only renames matching files) so the filtering is unambiguous.
Note the partial-match semantics of del_content — whether it matches substrings anywhere in the name — to prevent surprises on unintended matches.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; each section (function description, call signature, parameter table, examples) earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides a complete, executable call signature with all parameters, a typed parameter table with defaults, and copy-paste-ready usage examples. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The single action is unambiguous, but this is a batch rename (destructive/batch) operation and the body includes no validation or verification step (e.g. dry-run, confirmation, or post-rename check); the rubric caps workflow clarity at 2 for such operations. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A simple under-50-line single-purpose skill with no need for external references, organized into clearly labeled sections, satisfying the simple-skills allowance for a top score. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |