Content
93%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 tight, highly actionable reference skill that maps each inheritance question to exact MPS tools, enums, and response fields with minimal padding. The only soft spot is the absence of explicit validation/feedback steps, though none are strictly required for read-only operations.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and tool-name-dense, assuming Claude's MPS knowledge; it avoids explaining what MPS/concepts are and every section earns its tokens with actionable specifics. Only one or two orienting sentences are mildly trimmable, not enough to drop from the lean anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully actionable via exact tool names (`mps_mcp_get_project_structure`, `mps_mcp_query_structure`), specific enum values (`GET_ALL_SUPERCONCEPTS`, `IS_SUBCONCEPT_OF`), and concrete response fields (`extendedLanguages`, `superConcept`, `languageReference`) — Claude knows precisely what to call and read. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Tasks are clearly sequenced by question type with a numbered module-level procedure and a Best-Practice recommended order, but there are no explicit validation/feedback-loop checkpoints; this is acceptable for a read-only investigation skill yet caps below the anchor that requires explicit validation steps. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is under 50 lines, needs no bundle files, and is organized into well-signaled sections (Critical Directives, Module-Level, Concept-Level, Strategic Analysis, Best Practice, Related Skills) with one-level-deep cross-skill references — matching the simple-skill exception for a clean reference structure. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |