Content
72%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 skill body is concise and well-structured with a clear four-step workflow and concrete scoring rules. It would benefit from executable search specifics and basic validation/edge-case handling for empty or ambiguous results.
Suggestions
Provide concrete Grep examples (e.g. patterns/flags for title vs. frontmatter author search) and specify the papers directory path.
Add a validation/edge-case step for zero or ambiguous results (e.g. 'If no matches, broaden terms or report none found').
Clarify how match location is determined and displayed so the output step is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and well-organized with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete scoring rules (+10/+8/+5/+3) and a clear display format, but provides no actual Grep patterns/commands and leaves the 'papers directory' location unspecified, leaving key execution details missing. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Four steps are clearly sequenced, but there are no validation checkpoints (e.g. handling zero results, confirming matches) for this batch search operation. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references, the content is well-organized into clear sections (Goal, Workflow steps, Usage) — meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |