Content
86%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 well-structured, token-efficient overview that routes detail appropriately to real one-level-deep references and includes explicit verification expectations. The main gaps are the absence of a worked example for the trace workflow and an explicit fix-retry feedback loop.
Suggestions
Add a short worked example of tracing one failing step (e.g., a stale position after a successful approval) through the position/data -> ... -> refresh chain to make the workflow fully concrete.
State an explicit feedback loop after verification fails (e.g., re-trace from the failing step, then re-run the distinguishing check) to strengthen the workflow's error-recovery guidance.
Name the concrete commands or entry points used to search by action, endpoint, or refresh event so the trace step is executable without improvisation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~43-line body is lean and dense with domain-specific guidance — every sentence carries a rule Claude would not derive itself (e.g., 'An Earn page and a wallet DeFi tab can show the same investment through different data owners'), with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Matches anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance: an explicit trace chain ('position/data -> capability -> setup -> business action -> settlement -> refresh'), a concrete search strategy ('Search by the action, request endpoint, or refresh event'), and a scoping checklist, plus a question-keyed routing table to real reference files. Not 5 because there is no worked example or copy-paste-ready material covering common failure cases. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence is clearly ordered (trace the failing step -> establish scope and distinguishing evidence -> read only what is needed -> change -> verify -> handoff) with explicit validation checkpoints ('evidence that would distinguish the bug from a slow or unavailable dependency'; 'A submitted transaction or successful request alone does not prove that the position... have settled'). Not 5 because there is no explicit fix-and-revalidate feedback loop, and verification detail is delegated to validation.md rather than stated inline. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | SKILL.md is a lean overview with a question-keyed table routing to four real, one-level-deep reference files (all paths verified to exist, with no further nested links inside the references), plus clear delegation of adjacent topics to AGENTS.md and the sibling trade skill. Matches anchor 5: clear overview, well-signaled references, easy navigation. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |