Content
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-organized skill with strong progressive disclosure and a comprehensive best practices summary that covers the domain thoroughly. Its main weaknesses are the lack of inline executable code examples (all deferred to reference files) and the absence of validation/verification steps in the workflow modes. The persona and modes section adds some verbosity without proportional value.
Suggestions
Add 2-3 inline executable code examples for the most critical patterns (e.g., wrapping with %w, errors.Is/As usage, single handling rule violation vs correct approach) so the main SKILL.md is actionable without requiring reference file lookups.
Add explicit validation steps to the Coding and Review modes — e.g., 'After implementing error handling, grep for `_ =` and `log.*return.*err` patterns to verify no violations were introduced.'
Trim the persona and modes section — the sub-agent orchestration details could be condensed to a single line each, saving tokens for more valuable inline examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is mostly efficient — the best practices summary is well-structured and dense. However, the persona/modes section adds some unnecessary verbosity (sub-agent orchestration details Claude doesn't need spelled out), and the detailed reference descriptions repeat information already in the summary. The cross-references and external links sections are lean. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The best practices summary provides clear rules (e.g., 'use fmt.Errorf("{context}: %w", err)'), which is concrete guidance. However, there are no executable code examples in the main SKILL.md — all concrete code is deferred to reference files. The rules are specific enough to act on but lack the copy-paste-ready examples that would earn a 3. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The three modes (Coding, Review, Audit) provide some workflow structure, and the audit parallelization section gives clear sub-agent assignments. However, there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops — for example, no step to verify that error handling changes don't introduce regressions, and no explicit sequence for the coding or review modes beyond general descriptions. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure: concise overview with numbered best practices, then clearly signaled one-level-deep references to three detailed files (error-creation.md, error-wrapping.md, error-handling.md), plus well-organized cross-references to related skills. Each reference file has a brief description of what it covers, making navigation easy. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |