Content
75%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, highly actionable skill body: every scenario ships executable Node SDK code with exact method names, parameter shapes, and real-world constraints, and the routing to sibling skills is explicit and one level deep. Its main cost is redundancy — three sections restate the same use/don't-use boundary, and the summary adds a fourth pass — which inflates token spend without adding guidance value.
Suggestions
Collapse the 'Activation Contract' and 'When to use this skill' sections into one, and trim the 'Summary' to a short pointer list — the use/don't-use boundary is currently stated three to four times.
State the SDK initialization pattern once and omit the repeated tcb.init/app.auth() boilerplate from later scenarios, referencing Scenario 1 instead, to cut roughly 60 lines with no loss of actionability.
Move the 'Node Auth APIs covered by this skill' signature listing into a small reference file (or fold it into the scenario headers) so the SKILL.md body is pure scenarios and routing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The nine scenario code blocks are lean and copy-pasteable, but the body spends three separate sections restating the same scope guidance — "Activation Contract" ("Do NOT use for: Frontend login / sign-up UI"), "When to use this skill" ("Do NOT use this skill for: Frontend Web login / sign-up flows"), and "Summary" — plus a "Sibling skills" preamble, which is noticeable redundancy that could be collapsed. It is above anchor 2 because the padding is meta-routing text rather than explanations of concepts Claude already knows, and the API/scenario content itself is efficient. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The body provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready TypeScript for every scenario (e.g. "const { openId, appId, uid, customUserId } = auth.getUserInfo();", "await auth.queryUserInfo({ platform: "PHONE", platformId: "+86 13800000000" })", "auth.createTicket(customUserId, { refresh: 3600 * 1000, expire: 24 * 3600 * 1000 })"), plus exact constraints for customUserId ("Length 4–32 characters", allowed character set). Specific examples cover the common cases and the API-signature section enumerates every supported method. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | "How to use this skill (for a coding agent)" gives a clear five-step sequence (clarify runtime → confirm env/SDK → pick scenario → follow API shapes → handle uncertainty), and error handling is addressed via per-scenario try/catch and a best-practices "Error handling" block. Not 5 because there are no explicit validation checkpoints in the workflow itself — verification appears as scattered advice (e.g. "treat it as suspect and avoid using it") rather than a validate-then-proceed step; the destructive/batch cap does not apply since the operations are read/issue flows. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), so all content is inline in a single 445-line file, but it is well organized with clear headers (Activation Contract, APIs covered, Scenarios 1–9, Custom login tickets, Best practices, Summary) and clearly signaled one-level-deep sibling references ("../auth-tool-cloudbase/SKILL.md", "../auth-web-cloudbase/SKILL.md", "../http-api-cloudbase/SKILL.md"). Not 5 because some inlined bulk — the repeated tcb.init boilerplate in every scenario and the API-signature listing — is material that could live in a separate reference file, which the score-4 anchor's 'minor organization gaps' reflects. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |