Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is concise and highly actionable with executable CLI examples and clean organization. Its main weakness is the absence of validation/verification steps for destructive operations like move and delete.
Suggestions
Add a brief workflow with validation for destructive operations, e.g. verify a target path exists before `obsidian move` and confirm before `obsidian delete`.
Include a verification step after edits (e.g. re-read the note or check `obsidian dev:errors`) to close the feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean, command-focused content with no concept padding; assumes Claude's competence and every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable `obsidian` commands grouped by task (open, search, create, move, daily, properties) — copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Commands are grouped but there is no sequenced multi-step workflow with validation checkpoints; destructive ops like delete/move lack feedback loops, capping this at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A compact single file with well-organized sections and no bundle files; under the simple-skill threshold where good organization scores 3. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |