Content
90%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A token-efficient, highly actionable ASO skill body driven by comparison tables, concrete examples, and copy-paste output templates. Main gaps are the absence of explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loops and a long single-file structure that could externalize reference material into bundle files.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop to the listings/experiments workflow (e.g., re-check indexed keywords after publishing and iterate), to raise workflow_clarity.
Move dense reference tables (character limits, iOS-vs-Play comparison, Appeeky API details) into bundle files under references/ and link to them, reducing the single-file body length for better progressive disclosure.
Trim the opening 'You are a Google Play ASO expert' framing line to tighten conciseness further.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Dense, table-driven reference material (char limits, indexing weights, iOS-vs-Play comparison) plus concrete ✅/❌ examples and output templates earn their tokens; only the single opener 'You are a Google Play ASO expert' is mild padding that could be trimmed. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready scaffolds: a full-description structure block, Appeeky API calls (GET /v1/keywords/metrics...), a listing-draft template, and an audit scoring rubric (1–10 per field), matching the fully-executable anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Initial Assessment' and ratings-strategy sections give clear numbered sequences, and experiments have a validation threshold ('minimum 7 days or 1,000 impressions'), but there is no explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop. Not 3 because error-recovery checkpoints are absent; not 2 because sequences are explicit and a guardrail is present. | 2.5 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clear sections with a one-level 'Related Skills' footer and no nested references, but the ~190-line single-file body holds reference-style tables and API details that could be offloaded to bundle files for better progressive disclosure. Not 3 because of length and unsplit reference content; not 2 because organization and navigation are solid. | 2.5 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |