Content
90%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.
An exemplary planning playbook body: compact, actor-specific, and highly actionable, with strong safety gating on the destructive and ICS-write steps (authorization, named test points, abort triggers, deconfliction scope). The two residual gaps are the absence of post-action verification checkpoints and reliance on cross-directory catalog references rather than a self-contained bundle structure.
Suggestions
Add explicit post-action verification steps after the gated ICS write and canary detonation — e.g., verify only the named coil/register changed, confirm the canary file set is restored, and confirm cleanup.json inventory is complete before closing the phase (workflow_clarity).
Consolidate the external catalog references (sub-skill paths and `../../references/apt-groups.md`) into a single 'Referenced skills' section, or move shared lookup content like the industry → actor map into a references/ file within this bundle so navigation does not depend on the parent directory layout (progressive_disclosure).
State a concrete fallback checkpoint when no OT lab is available — the body says the ICS step is 'fully simulated' but does not specify what evidence the simulated path must produce for the deliverable (workflow_clarity).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~98-line body is dense and operational with zero filler: it never explains generic concepts (what MITRE is, what a PLC is) and every section carries unique content — the ThreatProfile seed, kill-chain table, CONOPS, OPSEC fidelity, safety gates, deconfliction, and deviation notes. Nothing is padded; every token earns its place, matching the lean anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully concrete and copy-paste ready: a fill-in ThreatProfile JSON seed for `plan/threat-profile.json`, a 10-row kill-chain table mapping each phase to MITRE technique, executing agent, and exact sub-skill path, a numbered CONOPS for `conops.json`, named tools (pymodbus, python-snap7, Sliver, NetExec), and quoted abort-trigger text for `abort.json`. Per the rubric's instruction-skill note, absence of code is not penalized since the routing guidance is exact and executable. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The destructive-operation cap does not apply — validation is explicitly present (written OT-write authorization, OT engineer on the contact plan, named test points, EMERGENCY abort trigger with halt + page + 1hr cooldown, deconfliction scope list, maintenance window). The 10-phase sequence is coherent with gates at each risky step, but there is no explicit post-action verification (e.g., confirm the ICS write landed only on the named test point, confirm canary restoration, confirm cleanup complete), which is the minor validation gap separating it from anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Structure is good: clear section headers, an overview-length body, and well-signaled one-level-deep references to per-phase sub-skills. However, the skill has no bundle files of its own and its references point into the surrounding catalog layout (e.g., `../../references/apt-groups.md` and `/skills/standard/...` paths) that cannot be resolved from this bundle, which is a minor navigation/organization gap versus the clean anchor-5 structure. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |