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 a well-structured, lean routing skill with concrete tool guidance and validation checkpoints for its destructive operations. Its main gaps are minor: a duplicated Purpose line, no parameter examples for create operations, and no explicit error-recovery loop.
Suggestions
Remove or repurpose the Purpose section, which duplicates the frontmatter description, to tighten conciseness toward 5.
Add a brief parameter example for the common create cases (at, daily, interval) so the guidance is fully copy-paste ready.
Add an explicit error-recovery feedback loop after the read-back step (e.g. 'if the read-back differs from intent, fix and re-run') to raise workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, but the Purpose section duplicates the frontmatter description verbatim, a minor redundancy that could be trimmed, placing it just below a clean 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete tool names with per-tool use notes and explicit decision rules (choose at, daily, or interval) give mostly executable guidance, but no parameter examples for the common create cases leave a minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered sequence with a read-back verification step (step 5) and an observe-result completion gate handles the destructive operations, but no explicit error-recovery feedback loop keeps it short of 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no external references needed, the content is well-organized into clear sections (Purpose, Tool routing, Workflow, Completion gates, Boundaries, Delivery), satisfying the simple-skill exception for a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |