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.
The content is a concise, well-structured instruction skill that gives Claude a clear, actionable hunting procedure and an explicit good-outcome (empty list when nothing was missed). Tightening the output-format specification and adding an explicit novelty-verification checkpoint would push it to full marks.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient with no concept padding or restating of what Claude already knows; directives like 'hunt where they did not look instead of re-walking their ground' make every token earn its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | As an instruction-only skill, code absence is not penalized, and the guidance is concrete ('Study the covered findings first', 'Dig into... untested edge cases, error and failure paths, unhandled inputs, cross-file interactions', 'return an empty issues list'); the only minor gap is that the exact output format/schema is implied rather than specified. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a clear sequence (study covered findings -> dig into untouched ground -> report only new issues or return empty), and this is a read-only analysis task so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply; the only minor gap is the absence of an explicit verification step that reported issues are truly novel. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, needs no external references, and is well-organized with clear headers ('How to hunt', 'What to report'), meeting the simple-skill exception for a top progressive-disclosure score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |