Content
93%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 a lean, well-structured instruction skill: concrete constraints, executable patterns, an explicit read-back validation step, and a single clearly signaled reference to the full authoring guide. The only notable gap is the absence of an error-recovery loop after the verification step, which keeps workflow clarity at 4 rather than 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~44-line body is dense with non-obvious, product-specific facts (41-char name limit, sandbox globals, "Do not use `node --check`... because the runtime wraps them in an async function", renderer-specific slash-command behavior) and explains nothing Claude already knows. It matches the 5 anchor — every token earns its place — rather than the 4 anchor, which requires trimmable over-explanation that is absent here. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully concrete and executable: exact naming rules, a copy-paste-ready literal `meta` declaration, an enumerated list of sandbox globals, an explicit `parallel([() => agent(...), () => agent(...)])` pattern, and the exact call `Workflow({ name: '<name>' })`. Per the rubric's scoring note, absence of full code in an instruction-only skill is not penalized when guidance is this actionable, and the full API is properly delegated to the `workflow-authoring` reference. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step Workflow has a clear sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint ("Read the saved file back and verify its name, metadata, phase order, dependency flow, and final return value") and the Updates section guards destructive operations. It stops short of the 5 anchor because there is no error-recovery feedback loop — what to do when the read-back verification fails is left implicit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple skill under 50 lines with no bundle files and no need for external references, so per the rubric guideline it qualifies for a 5 on well-organized sections alone. Sections (Boundary, Workflow, Script contract, Updates) are clean, and the one external pointer — "The `workflow-authoring` skill is the full reference" — is clearly signaled and exactly one level deep. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |