Content
50%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid conversational workflow skill that clearly outlines an interview-driven process for creating refactor plans. Its main strengths are the logical step sequence and the well-structured issue template. Its weaknesses are the lack of concrete executable examples (e.g., actual gh CLI commands, example commit breakdowns), missing validation/confirmation checkpoints before filing the issue, and some minor verbosity.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example of a good tiny-commit breakdown to illustrate the expected granularity (e.g., 'Commit 1: Extract method X from class Y; Commit 2: Add parameter to extracted method').
Include the actual `gh issue create` command or equivalent tool usage for filing the GitHub issue.
Add an explicit confirmation checkpoint before step 8 (e.g., 'Present the complete plan to the user and get explicit approval before creating the issue').
Consider extracting the issue template into a separate referenced file to improve progressive disclosure and keep the main skill leaner.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary phrasing like 'This skill will be invoked when...' and 'You may skip steps if you don't consider them necessary.' The template section is appropriately detailed for its purpose, though some inline comments within the template (e.g., explaining what makes a good test) could be trimmed. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The steps provide a clear interview-driven workflow and the issue template is concrete and well-structured. However, there are no concrete commands for creating the GitHub issue (e.g., `gh issue create`), no examples of what a good commit breakdown looks like, and the guidance remains at the level of natural language instructions rather than executable specifics. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 8 steps are clearly sequenced and logically ordered, progressing from problem understanding through implementation planning to issue creation. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints—for example, no step to confirm the plan with the user before filing the issue, and no feedback loop if the user disagrees with the scope or commit breakdown. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a single file with no bundle files, which is acceptable for a skill of this size. However, the issue template is inlined as a large block that could benefit from being a separate referenced file, and there are no references to examples or supporting materials that could help with complex cases. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |