Content
82%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 strong, actionable reference: executable commands, a complete worked example, and clearly sequenced workflows with lint-gating guidance. Its main weakness is that validation in the authoring workflow is stated as a step rather than an explicit feedback loop, and some reference material stays inline.
Suggestions
Promote the authoring workflow's lint step into an explicit validate -> fix -> re-lint feedback loop (e.g., 'Lint; if errors, fix and re-run; only return once lint passes').
Consider moving the full lint-rule reference and token-type table into a referenced file (e.g., reference/lint-rules.md) and linking from the body to tighten the overview.
Tighten the File anatomy example with a brief inline note that variant keys are siblings (currently duplicated in Pitfalls) to reduce repetition.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no "what is a design token" filler); every section earns its place, with only minor spots that could be tightened. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Copy-paste-ready npx commands, a complete YAML frontmatter example, a token-type table, and a lint-rule reference give fully executable coverage of the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Two clearly numbered workflows are present with a lint step and 'fix before returning' guidance; validation is mentioned as a step rather than an explicit validate->fix->retry feedback loop, leaving a minor checkpoint gap. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single well-organized SKILL.md with clear section headers and no bundle files; structure is good though some reference material (e.g., the full 9-rule lint set) is inlined rather than split out. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |