Content
78%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 body is an exemplary lean instruction skill — every sentence is an enforceable directive with concrete paths, fields, and conditionals. Its one real weakness is bundle integration: two reference files exist in the skill but the body never mentions them, leaving useful material unreachable and the structure unsignaled.
Suggestions
Reference the bundle files from the body, e.g. "For the expected RoE structure, see references/roe-example.json" and "Check the RoE against references/validation-checklist.md before relying on it."
Add minimal section headers (e.g. "## Read first", "## Handling changes") so the three directive groups are scannable.
Add an explicit verification checkpoint after reading the RoE (confirm required fields like scope, prohibited actions, and authorization source are present, escalating to the operator if not).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Three lean paragraphs of pure directives ("Soundwave may read it, but must never create, edit, replace, or sign it with filesystem tools") with no concept explanations or padding — every token instructs, matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor; it is not below 5 because nothing could be cut without losing a rule. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable instructions: exact path (plan/roe.json), exact fields to consume ("in-scope and out-of-scope targets, prohibited and permitted actions, authorization source, machine-enforcement rules"), and explicit conditionals ("If it is absent, ask the operator..."; "direct them to the system-managed engagement settings") — matching 'mostly executable guidance with minor gaps'; not 5 because it never points to the bundle's roe-example.json that would aid interpretation. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequence ("Read the existing RoE before writing other planning documents") with conditional branches for the absent-file and scope-change cases matches 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'; it is not 5 because there is no explicit verification step and the bundle's validation-checklist.md is never wired into the workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Scored against the actual bundle: references/roe-example.json and references/validation-checklist.md exist but neither is referenced or signaled anywhere in the body, so the references are effectively buried — matching 'references present but not clearly signaled'; it is not 4 because the body provides no navigation to the bundle files at all. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |