Content
92%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 strong, tight instruction skill: concrete git commands, an explicit commit-message template, safety rules, and a validation feedback loop. Its only weakness is the conventional-types table, which largely re-teaches standard knowledge Claude already has.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is command-first and lean with no padding, but the 11-row Types table restates the standard Conventional Commits type taxonomy Claude already knows. Fits anchor 4 (efficient, minor trimmable over-explanation) rather than 5, where every token must earn its place. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable commands throughout ("git status", "git diff --staged", "git log --oneline -10", "git add -p"), a fill-in message template, and hard rules like "Never use `--no-verify`". Fully executable guidance covering the common cases, matching anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Six clearly sequenced steps with an explicit feedback loop ("If pre-commit hooks fail, fix the cause and re-commit") and validation guardrails (no secrets, protected `main` branch). Matches anchor 5's clear sequence with explicit validation and error-recovery loop. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references; the body is well-organized into Steps, Types, and Notes sections, and no bundle files exist that should be split out. Per the rubric's simple-skill guidance this earns anchor 5 on well-organized sections alone. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |