Content
88%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, well-organized routing skill that efficiently points to its sub-skills with concrete routing rules and per-lens specifics. Its main gap is that the referenced slop/ and test/ sub-skill bundles are not present alongside SKILL.md to verify the navigation targets.
Suggestions
Ship the slop/ and test/ sub-skill directories referenced in the body so the one-level-deep navigation targets actually exist alongside SKILL.md.
Add a brief one-line note in the Routing section on how to confirm which sub-skill applies when a task spans both review and testing, to remove ambiguity in mixed tasks.
Consider a short inline example of a routed decision (e.g., a sample user request → chosen sub-skill) to make the routing rule immediately actionable without opening the sub-skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no padding or re-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line (scope, sub-skills, routing) earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete routing rules and specific per-lens guidance (CCCR, one behavior per it, stub only the true external boundary, file:line findings) are present, but the executable test-authoring steps are delegated to sub-skills rather than given inline. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | As a routing skill with a single unambiguous decision (identify task type then apply the matching sub-skill), the workflow is clear and well-sequenced; no destructive/batch validation is needed here. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clean structure with a concise overview pointing one level deep to sub-skills, but the referenced slop/ and test/ sub-skill directories are not present in the bundle to verify. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |