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 body is a lean, well-structured, instruction-only skill with concrete tool names, parameters, and a clear recall-to-writeback workflow gated by use_policy and conflict rules. Its main gaps are minor redundancy in the evidence-vs-instruction rules and the absence of an example invocation or an explicit recall-validation checkpoint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient: it lists exact tool names, parameter lists, write-back categories, and use_policy fields without explaining concepts Claude already knows, with only minor redundancy between the two evidence-vs-instruction paragraphs (lines 66 and 68), fitting the efficient-with-minor-trimming anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is concrete and executable for an instruction-only skill, naming specific tools (openbrain_recall, openbrain_writeback) with exact parameters and categories plus use_policy field semantics, but it stops short of a copy-paste example invocation, matching mostly-executable-with-minor-gaps rather than fully copy-paste ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The process is clearly sequenced (Pre-Task Recall with use_policy/conflict gates -> work -> Post-Task Write-Back with do/don't lists -> Usage Reporting) with most checkpoints present; it lacks an explicit recall-success validation step, placing it just below the explicit-validation-with-feedback-loops anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized with clear section headers and no nested references (no bundle files exist to verify against), and the two specialized modes are reasonably scoped inline, fitting good-structure-with-minor-organization-gaps rather than the fully one-level-deep reference pattern at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |