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 tight, well-structured review skill that adds judgment heuristics Claude would not derive on its own and sequences the review process with evidence checkpoints. Actionability is strong for an instruction-only skill but lacks concrete commands or worked examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it gives review heuristics like 'A reproducible behavior is not automatically a bug' and 'Passing tests or a clean bot review does not make that product decision' that earn their tokens rather than padding with concepts Claude already knows. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific directives ('Compare omitted defaults, explicit overrides, errors, serialization', 'Test the old minimum when compatibility is claimed') that are actionable for an instruction-only skill; held below 5 because there are no copy-paste commands or examples covering common cases. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequenced review flow (read docs/diff → establish contract → assess compatibility → report findings → follow CI) with explicit evidence-quality checkpoints ('Record which checks were run and at what revision', 'Keep uncertainty explicit'); minor gaps in explicit validate→fix→retry loops keep it at 4. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with well-organized sections and a single one-level-deep, clearly signaled external reference (Use [review-pr](../review-pr/SKILL.md)), matching the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |