Content
75%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 skill body is a well-structured, mostly executable guide to producing conventional commits with sensible validation guardrails. Its main gaps are a missing concrete `git commit` HEREDOC example and validation steps that are separated from the main process flow.
Suggestions
Add a concrete `git commit` command using a HEREDOC example so the Execute step is copy-paste ready.
Integrate the secret-detection and hook-failure checks as inline checkpoints within the Process steps rather than only in the Rules section.
Trim the Context section, which mostly restates what Claude can infer from the conversation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is largely lean with well-scoped reference material (commit-type table, format, examples), with only minor over-explanation such as the "Context" section restating what Claude can infer from the conversation. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete commands (git status, git diff, git add, git log) and copy-ready commit-message examples, but never shows the actual `git commit` invocation with the HEREDOC it tells the user to use, leaving a small gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear Analyze → Stage → Type → Scope → Message sequence is present with validation (secret detection, no-changes check, hook-failure feedback loop), but the validation steps live in a separate Rules section rather than being inline checkpoints in the Process flow. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized into clear sections (Context, Process, Commit Format, Examples, Rules, Execute) and is appropriately self-contained with no nested references; at 86 lines it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception that would allow a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |