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.
A lean, highly actionable architecture-and-routing reference with a clear submission checklist, weakened only by a missing central referenced file (DESIGN.md) that the body repeatedly defers to for normative detail.
Suggestions
Add the missing ./DESIGN.md to the bundle (or replace the ./DESIGN.md references with the correct existing path), since the body cites it three times as the authoritative dialog/self-check spec.
For the few architectural entries that read as principles ('decide whether it truly belongs here vs. local component state', 'no TUI-state dependency → src/utils; depends on TUI state → src/tui/utils'), add a one-line concrete example or decision rule so they are directly applicable.
Tighten the 'Before you submit' section into an explicit validate→fix→retry loop (e.g. re-run lint/test until clean) to lift workflow clarity above a single end-of-task checkpoint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a dense, information-packed routing guide that assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what a TUI, chalk, or a controller is, and nearly every line is a routing decision, file-path assignment, or hard constraint, so every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, copy-usable guidance — exact file paths per feature type ('CLI arguments → src/cli/commands.ts / src/cli/options.ts') and per-controller responsibilities — but a few entries are architectural decision rules rather than executable steps and there is no runnable code/command, keeping it just below the fully copy-paste-ready bar. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear orient-then-route-then-validate flow is present ('Before writing TUI code, read apps/kimi-code/AGENTS.md' up front, a 'Before you submit' checklist with lint/format/test and the DESIGN.md self-check at the end), providing a real validation checkpoint, but there is no explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop for the operations involved. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Structure and signaling are good — section headers, one-level-deep references to AGENTS.md and DESIGN.md with markdown links — but the centrally-referenced ./DESIGN.md (cited 3× as the normative dialog spec and self-check list) is absent from the skill folder, so the promised disclosure path (overview → DESIGN.md for details) is broken for the reader. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |