Content
17%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 persona-heavy shell with no domain substance: generic instructions applicable to any skill, repeated persona fluff, and a link list to ten sub-skill files and a playbook that do not exist in the bundle. A model invoking this skill would receive no usable customer-support guidance and every reference it was told to open would fail.
Suggestions
Replace the generic Instructions ("Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes") with concrete, domain-specific guidance: actual steps for common support tasks (e.g., triaging a ticket, drafting a refund response, setting up a sentiment-analysis pipeline) with executable commands or templates and explicit validation checkpoints.
Fix the broken reference layer: either add the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md and sub-skills/*.md files to the bundle, or remove the links and inline concise, actionable content for the highest-value modules.
Delete the duplicated persona sections ("You are an elite..." paragraph and "Expert Purpose") and the empty "Capabilities" header; spend those tokens on one or two worked examples instead, and give each remaining sub-skill link a one-line description so the module list guides discovery.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Roughly half the prose is persona padding — "You are an elite AI-powered customer support specialist focused on delivering exceptional customer experiences", a separate "Expert Purpose" paragraph restating the same persona ("Master customer support professional... Combines deep empathy with cutting-edge technology"), and an empty "Capabilities" header. These are padded sections that add no information Claude doesn't have, matching anchor 2; not 3 because the padding is a large fraction of the total content, not a minor instance. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | The only instructions are generic boilerplate — "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs. Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes. Provide actionable steps and verification" — which could apply to any skill in any domain, and there is no code, command, example, checklist, or domain-specific step anywhere in the body. This matches anchor 1 ("Entirely vague or abstract; no concrete code or commands; only describes rather than instructs"); not 2 because even high-level hints specific to customer support are absent. | 1 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A rough sequence exists (clarify goals, apply best practices, validate outcomes, provide steps) but the steps are poorly defined, purely generic, and validation is mentioned only abstractly ("validate outcomes") with no checkpoint or feedback loop — despite the skill claiming ten modules of complex multi-step work such as ticketing workflows and crisis management. This matches anchor 2 ("Rough sequence present but many gaps; steps poorly defined; validation absent"); not 3 because the listed steps carry no domain-specific content at all. | 2 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The one-level-deep reference structure is well signaled (a numbered list of ten sub-skill links plus a pointer to resources/implementation-playbook.md), but the bundle contains none of these files — every referenced path is dangling, so the disclosure layer is non-functional in practice and the skill's only concrete instruction ("open resources/implementation-playbook.md") dead-ends. Scored against the actual bundle structure per the judging guidelines, this lands at anchor 2 (minimal structure); not 1 because the overview itself is navigable and references are clearly signaled rather than buried or nested. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 7 / 20 Passed |