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 content is a tight, well-structured git commit workflow with concrete commands, a validation checkpoint, and sensible guards. The main gaps are leaving the actual commit command slightly implicit and light error-recovery guidance after a failed check.
Suggestions
Show the literal staging/commit commands, e.g. `git add <files>` then `git commit -m "type(scope): description"`, and the branch switch (`git switch -c <branch>`) so the workflow is fully copy-paste ready.
Add a brief fix-and-retry loop after a failed check (review errors, fix, re-run checks, then commit) to strengthen the validation feedback path.
Optionally note that the plain-string commit message should be drafted from the analyzed diff rather than just stated as a rule.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — every line is an actionable instruction or command with no concept padding, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete commands like `git status`, `git diff HEAD`, and `git log --oneline -10` plus the conventional-commit spec are executable, but the final `git add`/commit invocation and branch-switch flag are left implied rather than given as full commands, leaving minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Five numbered steps with parallel state-gathering, a main-branch guard, a secrets check, and the "Stop if any checks fail" checkpoint give a clear sequence; error-recovery detail on how to fix and re-run is lighter than the explicit validate/retry anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no external references needed, the skill is cleanly organized into Arguments and Steps sections, satisfying the simple-skill exception for a well-organized single-purpose skill. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |