Content
70%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-structured with a clear validated workflow and good progressive disclosure to real reference files, but the UPHY-ownership message is repeated and the executable DT fragment itself lives only in the referenced procedure file rather than inline.
Suggestions
Consolidate the repeated UPHY-lane-ownership reminder into one place (e.g., the Gotchas entry) and have other sections cross-reference it, to tighten conciseness.
Include a minimal inline .dts fragment example (status="okay" + mdio child with #address-cells/#size-cells) so the body is actionable without opening procedure.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and task-relevant with no padding of concepts Claude already knows, but the UPHY-ownership point is restated across the Overview, Procedure Step 5, and two Gotchas, so it could be tightened to fully earn a 3. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete commands (dtc, fdtoverlay, cpp, pin_verifier.py), exact paths, the marker contract, and a real error signature ('fmon_update_config: detected fault 0x80') are present, but the core deliverable — the .dts overlay fragment — is not shown inline (delegated to procedure.md), so the body is not copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | An explicit 8-step sequence with validation checkpoints (Step 4 pin verify + auto-fix, Step 6 cpp/dtc/fdtoverlay pre-flight, Step 8 summary) and feedback loops for the destructive commit, matching the clear-sequence-with-explicit-validation anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A concise overview in SKILL.md points one level deep to real bundle files (references/procedure.md, references/questions.json) with well-signaled one-line descriptions in a References section, matching the clear-overview-with-one-level-references anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |