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.
The body is a lean, well-structured instruction-only skill with concrete tool routing, a sequenced workflow, and explicit completion gates. It is strong overall, with only minor gaps in actionability (no example output / ranking method) and workflow clarity (no failure-recovery loop).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient: a compact tool-routing table, a numbered workflow, and terse gate/boundary lists with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. The only minor redundancy is the 'Purpose' line restating the frontmatter description, but it does not meaningfully dilute the token efficiency. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It names concrete tools (web_fetch, browser_use, render_chart) with specific uses and enumerates a six-field confirmation checklist plus explicit completion gates. It stops short of fully executable guidance: no example output format, and 'rank by impact and confidence' leaves the ranking method unspecified. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence is paired with a separate 'Completion gates' validation checklist (date every item, source URLs, distinguish confirmed vs. forecast, verify title/cutoff match). The gap is the absence of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop describing what to do when a gate fails. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is well under 50 lines with no need for external references, and is organized into clearly labeled sections (Purpose, Tool routing, Workflow, Completion gates, Boundaries, Delivery), which per the rubric's simple-skills note merits a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |