Content
86%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.
A strong, lean strategy skill: concrete numbers, a complete output template, and genuine validation floors (14-day minimum, 1,000-page-view statistical floor, kill criteria). Its only weaknesses are minor — small redundancy across the caveats sections and a few checkpoints (MMP attribution verification, post-underperformance iteration) that live in caveats instead of the main workflow.
Suggestions
Consolidate the repeated caveats: the not-an-A/B-test and organic-traffic warnings each appear in the "CPPs are NOT" table, "When CPPs Are Worth It", and "Common Mistakes" — state each once and cross-reference to trim tokens.
Promote the MMP attribution check from a Social Ads caveat into a numbered step in the review+launch plan, so the verification loop (wire URL → verify attribution → judge at 14 days) is explicit.
Add an explicit iterate step after a CPP underperforms (e.g., 'if below kill threshold: swap URL to new variant, keep old CPP stopped') to close the feedback loop the kill criteria imply.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and table-driven with no padding of concepts Claude already knows — the CPP-specific facts (35 variants, 1–3 day review, 170-char promo text) are genuinely additive. It sits at the 4 anchor rather than 5 because a few caveats are repeated across sections: the not-A/B-test distinction appears in the "CPPs are NOT" table, "When CPPs Are Worth It", and "Common Mistakes", and organic-traffic caveats appear twice. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully concrete for an instruction-only skill: a complete fill-in output template (baseline, variants with source/angle/promo/screenshot plan/hypothesis/success metric, review+launch plan, kill criteria), specific ASA steps ("In ASA → Ad Group → Creative Sets, assign the CPP URL"), and hard numbers throughout (10 screenshots, 3 preview videos, ≥1,000 page views, 14 days minimum). Not 4 because the guidance covers the common cases end-to-end with copy-paste-ready structure. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence is clear and well ordered — initial assessment questions, one-axis variant selection, the output template's review/launch plan, measurement, and kill criteria — with real validation checkpoints (≥14 days of data, ≥1,000 page views statistical floor, revert-if-below-baseline kill rules). It stops short of 5 because some checkpoints are stated as caveats rather than sequenced steps (e.g., MMP attribution verification appears only as a caveat in the Social Ads section, not as a step in the launch flow), and there is no explicit iterate/fix loop after a variant underperforms. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is self-contained with no bundle files and no content that clearly belongs in separate references — every section earns its place at overview level, and navigation is easy via clear section headers and tables. Cross-references point to sibling skills (aso-audit, screenshot-optimization, ab-test-store-listing) rather than buried files, matching the well-organized self-contained pattern the rubric rewards for simple single-topic skills. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |