Content
81%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 highly actionable orchestration pipeline: every phase names its agent, inputs, output path, return contract, and failure branch, with strong validation gates and error-recovery loops. Its weakness is repetition — the write-exception rule is explained three times and the collapse-announcement rationale runs long — which costs tokens without adding guidance, and the single-file monolith forgoes bundle-based disclosure.
Suggestions
Consolidate the bounded write-exception rule into one section — it is currently stated in Phase 0's team.size bullet, the "Why this does not violate the Collaboration Protocol" blockquote, and the File Write Protocol section.
Trim the "Announce the active set" rationale (including the team-release/team-narrative comparison) to the rule plus one example, and split the 200+ word team.size run-on into sub-bullets.
Move the bounded-exception policy and the announce-collapse rationale into a reference file (e.g., references/write-policy.md) so SKILL.md stays an overview.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Most of the body is dense, functional orchestration detail (paths, contracts, phase specs), but it is noticeably loose in places: the bounded write-exception rule is stated three times (Phase 0 expansion, the "Why this does not violate the Collaboration Protocol" blockquote, and the File Write Protocol section), the `team.size` bullet is a 200+ word run-on mixing several rules, and the "Announce the active set" section spends ~25 lines justifying the rule including meta-commentary on team-release/team-narrative. Not 2 because the padding is a minority and is project-specific policy rather than concepts Claude already knows; not 4 because the triple repetition and run-on paragraph are clear tightening targets. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill the guidance is copy-paste ready: a verbatim return-contract prompt to append to every agent, an exact per-agent output-path table, verbatim usage/ethics-flag/BLOCKED message strings, a concrete `!`bash` config-resolution command, and a fill-in announce template. The common cases (agent BLOCKED, artifact missing from disk, ethics policy absent, user cancels) each have exact prescribed text and next actions. Not 4 because no material gap remains — every phase names its agent, inputs, outputs, and failure branch. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Seven phases are clearly sequenced with explicit parallelization points (Phase 3 ‖ Phase 4, Phase 5 internal parallelism), AskUserQuestion decision gates at phase transitions, and strong validation checkpoints: verify the returned artifact exists on disk before treating a phase as done, ethics review with explicit missing-file and violation branches, a re-spawn feedback loop (corrected economy design → return to Phase 7), and defined COMPLETE/BLOCKED verdicts. This matches the anchor-5 pattern of clear sequence with explicit validation and error-recovery loops; not 4 because no checkpoint is left implicit. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), so everything is inline in one ~230-line SKILL.md with clear per-phase headers and a well-signaled output-path table. External references (`.claude/docs/automation-modes.md`, `config-resolution.md`, `error-recovery-protocol.md`, `design/live-ops/economy-rules.md`, `ethics-policy.md`) are one level deep and clearly named. Not 5 because the file is a monolith rather than an overview pointing to detailed materials — the bounded-exception policy and announce rationale inlined here would sit better in a reference file; not 3 because structure and navigation are good and no reference is buried or nested. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |