Content
75%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 dense, expert-level instruction-only body that consistently provides framework-specific, actionable guidance with explicit verification steps and a logical task sequence. Its main gaps are the absence of even one concrete code example and a slightly monolithic inline structure for a skill of this scope.
Suggestions
Include a minimal executable FastMCP example — e.g. a tool definition with `Literal` choices and a `Field` description, or the fetch/filter/return example the body itself recommends — to make the guidance copy-paste ready.
Move the agent-workflow evaluation guidance into a one-level-deep reference file (e.g. EVALUATION.md) referenced from the body, keeping SKILL.md as a tighter overview.
Trim generic-principle sentences (e.g. "Give clients enough context to use results and recover from errors") that restate what a competent model already knows, keeping only the FastMCP-specific mechanics.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | No padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; nearly every sentence is a FastMCP-specific fact ("select `/v3/` pages for FastMCP 3", "With `mask_error_details=True`, ordinary exceptions such as `ValueError` lose their messages"), but a few generic-principle sentences ("Let the intended client tasks guide tool boundaries...", "Give clients enough context to use results") could be trimmed — the 'efficient with minor over-explanation' anchor rather than 'every token earns its place'. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is concretely executable for an instruction-only skill — exact error classes ("`ToolError`, `ResourceError`, or `PromptError` from `fastmcp.exceptions`"), exact mechanisms (`Literal` or enums, `Field` descriptions, `functools.wraps`, `Client` in-process testing), and exact doc-navigation rules ("Read individual pages through their `.md` URLs instead of loading `llms-full.txt`"). Not a 5 because it advises "a short fetch/filter/return example" without providing one and offers no minimal server snippet — minor gaps remain. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequence — find the current API, author the server, verify, then evaluate agent workflows — with explicit verification checkpoints ("Check a representative operation, its client-visible schema and result, and a meaningful failure"; for writes "check both the intended change and what should remain unchanged"). Not a 5 because the checkpoints lack numbered-step and feedback-loop structure and a couple remain implicit; not a 3 because validation is present and explicit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Three well-organized sections with no buried references and appropriately external doc URLs; however, at ~90 lines it exceeds the simple-skill exception, and self-contained material like the agent-evaluation guidance or the Skills-extension details could be split into one-level-deep reference files, matching 'good structure; minor organization gaps' rather than 'content appropriately split'. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |