Content
85%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 compact, well-structured body for a simple tool: clear interface, explicit failure modes, and appropriate file layout, with only minor over-explanation in the rationale paragraph and a missing invocation example.
Suggestions
Add a one-line invocation example in the body (e.g. `python read.py --input path/to/file.txt`) to make usage copy-paste ready.
Tighten the 'exists alongside read_file' paragraph to a single sentence, trusting Claude to understand the lineno-decoration point.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with tight inputs/output/failure-modes sections, but the 'This skill exists alongside...' contrast paragraph restates rationale and explains how the builtin read_file works, a minor instance of over-explanation that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete interface details are present — real argument names, defaults, output semantics, and exit-code failure modes — but no explicit invocation example is shown in the body, a minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a simple single-purpose skill whose single action (read file → emit verbatim content) is unambiguous, and failure modes are explicitly enumerated with exit codes; per the simple-skill exception this scores 5. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references, the body is well-organized into clear sections (Inputs, Output, Failure modes), and the only bundle file (scripts/read.py) is appropriately kept external as the entrypoint rather than inlined. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |