Content
63%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 content is highly actionable reference material with concrete fixes and worked examples, and the pre-submission workflow is clear. Its main weaknesses are inlined bulk (no progressive disclosure — platform manuals should be separate reference files), duplicated checklist content, and a promotional footer that wastes tokens.
Suggestions
Split each platform's policy checklist (Google, Meta, LinkedIn, TikTok, Reddit) and the industry-specific rules into separate files under references/ (e.g. references/google-ads.md), keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep links.
Remove the promotional 'About this skill' footer and the ad-performance tips ("less polished = better", text-in-image delivery advice) — they consume tokens without adding policy-compliance value.
Replace the separate pre-launch checklist template with a pointer to the universal checks section (or vice versa) to eliminate the duplicated checklist, and add an explicit appeal→re-review feedback loop to the rejection-fix workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly dense, platform-specific policy data Claude does not reliably know, but it includes unnecessary padding: a promotional 'About this skill' footer with marketing links, a pre-launch checklist template that largely duplicates the earlier universal checks, and performance tips ("Native-feeling content performs best", "Less text = more delivery") that are ad advice rather than policy guidance. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance throughout: violation→example→fix tables, approved/rejected copy rewrites ("Are you overweight?" → "Many people manage their weight with..."), appeal methods per platform, and a worked financial-services review with a verdict. Minor gaps — unsourced appeal 'success rate' percentages and vague directives like "comply with local regulations" — keep it below fully copy-paste-ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The pre-submission workflow is clearly sequenced by check category (copy → targeting → landing page → legal), the checklist template ends in an explicit APPROVED/BLOCKED gate, and the worked example shows PASS/WARNINGS/REQUIRED FIXES. Not a 5 because the appeal→re-review feedback loop is only implicit and per-platform scans are presented as static checklists rather than an ordered procedure. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section headers are clear and well-ordered, but the file is ~570 lines with all five platform-specific policy manuals, industry rules, trademark tables, and appeal data inlined in SKILL.md and no references/ files at all — content that clearly belongs in separate one-level-deep reference files is inline, matching the anchor 3 pattern rather than a well-split structure. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |