Content
78%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 an efficient, well-structured instruction-only skill: a concrete TDD loop, actionable coverage rules, and an unusually clear division of verification ownership between local runs and PR CI, complete with real commands. Its only weaknesses are mild wordiness in the policy section and the absence of an example local verification command.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and directive with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows; the Verification Ownership section's policy sentences ("Verification is evidence about the candidate; CI is the automated execution venue...") are slightly abstract and could be tightened, keeping it just below 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete commands are given (`go test ./...`, `go test -tags e2e ./internal/server/...`) alongside specific directives like "run a focused regression test and tests for the affected package(s) locally"; the minor gap is that no example of the focused local command is shown, so it is mostly rather than fully executable. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The TDD loop is a clearly numbered sequence with an inherent fail-test-then-implement feedback loop, and verification checkpoints are explicit ("Do not report CI evidence until those checks actually run", "Report checks that could not run as missing evidence"). It is not 5 because no explicit recovery step exists for a failing local run; not 3 because checkpoints are present and explicit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, and requires no external references; its four clean sections (When to Use, TDD Loop, Coverage Rules, Verification Ownership) are well-organized, which per the rubric's simple-skill guidance earns a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |