Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is concise, actionable, and well-structured with verified one-level-deep references. Its main gap is workflow clarity: the rules read as a checklist rather than an ordered, validated sequence.
Suggestions
Convert 'Core rules' into an ordered step list (pick source type/folder -> create note -> update `_system/registry.md` -> conditionally update `02-Index.md` -> conditionally log in `Daily/`) so the sequence is explicit.
Add a verification checkpoint, e.g. confirm the new note is linked from `_system/registry.md` and that no top-level `Papers/` was created, before finishing.
Clarify what 'important sources' means for the `02-Index.md` update rule, since that qualifier is currently subjective.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean: it assumes Claude knows what Obsidian and source notes are, states only essential rules and targets, and contains no padding or restated concepts, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, named actions — update `_system/registry.md`, update `02-Index.md`, append to today's `Daily/`, and avoid a top-level `Papers/` — which are specific and actionable for an instruction-only skill where code absence is not penalized. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The core rules imply a sequence (create note, update registry, update index, log in Daily) but are not ordered as steps and lack any validation/verification checkpoint, fitting the sequence-present-but-checkpoints-implicit anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview with a clearly signaled 'Read next' section pointing one level deep to five reference files, all of which exist in references/, matching the clear-overview-with-one-level-deep-references anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |