Content
92%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.
A well-structured, lean QA-gate skill with explicit checkpoints, a feedback loop, and clean delegation to authoritative task files. The only gap is that the substantive review procedure lives in referenced files rather than inline, leaving actionability slightly dependent on external content.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean instruction-only body with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line is an instruction, pointer, or checkpoint, assuming Claude's competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance is present — specific paths ('docs/qa/gates/'), file names ('qa-gate.md'), verdict values, and lifecycle transitions — but the core review procedure is delegated to an external task file rather than fully specified inline. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A numbered protocol, a verdict→status-action table, and an explicit 'Post-phase verification' checklist provide a clear sequence with validation checkpoints and a FAIL→InProgress feedback loop. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A clear overview that delegates authoritative detail to well-signaled one-level-deep references (primary 'qa-gate.md', supporting 'qa-review-story.md', lifecycle rules), with content appropriately split and easy to navigate. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |