Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-organized, actionable, token-efficient workflow body whose only real gap is the absence of an explicit verification checkpoint after merging destructive changes into main specs.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation step after applying changes (e.g., re-read the updated main spec to confirm requirements match the delta intent and that the result is well-formed) before showing the summary, turning the workflow into a validate->fix->retry loop.
Make idempotency checkable: instruct Claude to verify that re-running produces no further diff, rather than only asserting idempotency as a guardrail.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and structured with bullets and short steps, assumes Claude's competence, and reserves explanation for the genuinely skill-specific 'Intelligent Merging' concept rather than padding with basics Claude already knows. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance: exact file paths (openspec/changes/<name>/specs/*/spec.md, openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md), a real command (openspec list --json), a named tool (AskUserQuestion), and a worked delta-spec format example — fully actionable for an instruction-only skill. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–4 are clearly sequenced, but editing main specs is a destructive/batch operation with no explicit verification checkpoint (only a summary), so per the rubric's feedback-loop guidance workflow clarity is capped at 2 rather than reaching the explicit-validation level above. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the skill is self-contained, organized into clearly labeled sections (Steps, Delta Spec Format Reference, Key Principle, Output, Guardrails) with no nested references, satisfying the well-organized-sections bar for a reference-free skill. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |