Content
72%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 exemplary in its token efficiency and clean I/O contract, and appropriately avoids bundle files. Its weakness is that it specifies what to report but not how to execute or verify: the three result classes are undefined, and no validation/verification checkpoint is described even though verification evidence is a required output. A short definition of each result class and an explicit verify-before-report step would close the gap.
Suggestions
Define the three result classes (e.g. done = all acceptance criteria verified; blocked = external dependency missing; needs_rework = own output failed verification) so classification is unambiguous.
Add an explicit verification checkpoint step, such as 'Run the verification expectation before reporting done; only report done when evidence passes,' to anchor workflow clarity.
State where the task packet reference is read and what to do with non-goals/scope boundaries, so execution guidance is actionable rather than implied.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The 27-line body is lean and efficient with zero padding: it assumes competence and only lists the input contract, the three output classes, and required evidence fields. Every token earns its place; nothing explains concepts Claude already knows. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | The I/O contract is concrete (named result classes done/blocked/needs_rework, named evidence fields like "files touched, commands run, verification evidence"), but there is no guidance on how to execute the work item, and the semantics distinguishing done vs blocked vs needs_rework are undefined. Matches 'some concrete guidance but incomplete, missing key details'; not 4 because a reader could not act on it without guessing the classification rules. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Inputs and output are clearly separated but the execute -> verify -> report sequence is only implicit, and there is no validation checkpoint despite the skill's whole purpose being to report "verification evidence". Scored under the simple-skill exception (single task, under 50 lines) but the single action is not unambiguous and verification guidance is absent, so it cannot exceed 3; not 2 because the contract structure does impose a coherent frame. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-task skill with no external references needed; the two sections (Inputs, Output) are well organized and the bundle contains no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories, so nothing is inlined that belongs elsewhere. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline this earns full marks. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |