Content
67%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, actionable process skill with a clear seven-step workflow, explicit validation checkpoints, and concrete tool handoffs. Main weaknesses are repeated build-report waiver language that inflates token cost and the absence of any worked sizing example to ground the method guidance.
Suggestions
State the $build-report handoff and waiver rule once (either in Related Skills or step 7) and reference it from the other location instead of repeating it nearly verbatim.
Add one brief worked example of a sizing calculation chain (e.g., population x adoption x price with labeled fact vs. assumption inputs) to anchor the abstract method guidance and lift actionability.
Move the method-selection guidance (top-down/bottom-up/value-based trade-offs) and the source-discovery configuration into a reference file to reduce SKILL.md length and improve progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and free of concept-explaining padding, but noticeably repeats itself: the $build-report waiver logic appears nearly verbatim in "Related Skills" and again in step 7, and source-availability caveats appear in both the "Source Access Guardrail" section and step 3. This matches "mostly efficient but could be tightened" better than anchor 4's minor-trim level. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Per the rubric's instruction-skill note, absence of code is not penalized, and the guidance is concrete: explicit method-selection rules ("a top-down model works when reliable aggregate market data exists..."), a framing checklist, and named tool handoffs ($jupyter-notebooks, $Spreadsheets, $gather-business-context, $validate-data). The gap keeping it below anchor 5 is the lack of any worked example of a sizing calculation chain or assumption table. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Seven clearly numbered steps with framing and conclusion checklists, plus validation checkpoints ("verify selected data through live reads before concluding", sensitivity testing, $validate-data review). Not a destructive or batch skill, so no cap applies; it falls short of anchor 5 only because validation is largely delegated to other skills rather than embedded as explicit fix-retry feedback loops. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, so all ~110 lines of guidance live inline in SKILL.md with well-organized sections and subsections — good structure with nothing misplaced. It does not qualify for the under-50-line simple-skill exception, and content such as method-selection detail or source-discovery configuration could reasonably be split into reference files, keeping it at anchor 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |