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 tight, self-contained review procedure with exact file paths, tool calls, priority definitions with evidentiary requirements, and a concrete output template. The only improvements are marginal: trimming one over-explained warning and adding an explicit pre-report verification step.
Suggestions
Tighten the footprint-geometry warning in step 3 to its rule and one-line rationale (e.g., 'Never derive geometry from footprint source — footprint-local coordinates must be composed with placement rotation and board side first'), dropping the past-failure anecdote.
Add an explicit final checkpoint before ending the turn, such as 'Before finishing, re-check that every P0 and P1 line cites its measurement or report line', to close the workflow's validation gap.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence — no PCB fundamentals are explained, and lines like 'The sole declared finished board thickness is the `finishedThicknessMm` value under `manufacturing`' carry pure operational weight. One passage is trimmable: the footprint warning's failure anecdote ('a review that skipped that step has reported copper shorts that do not exist and prescribed a fix that would have broken a correct footprint') is motivating but over-explains, fitting the efficient-with-minor-trimming anchor rather than the every-token-earns-its-place anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill, guidance is fully executable: exact files to read ('source/pcb.config.json', 'product/bom.json', 'product/constraints.json', 'reports/'), the exact tool to call ('Call `pcb.measure` for anything physical') with its returned sub-objects enumerated, the authoritative location of the thickness value, a concrete report template, and termination rules ('write `No findings.` after the summary and stop'). No gaps remain for the common case. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence with real checkpoints: an evidentiary rule ('Every `P0` must cite a measurement or a report conclusion. If you cannot measure it, it is not a `P0`'), a conflict-resolution rule for thickness, and a defined end state. It sits just below the anchor-5 example because there is no final self-verification pass (e.g., re-checking each P0's citation before ending the turn) and no error-recovery loop, which the top anchor expects. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill has no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist) and needs none: at ~44 lines it is self-contained and cleanly sectioned (Procedure, Priorities, Report Format, Out of scope), matching the scoring note that short skills with no need for external references score 5 on well-organized sections alone. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |