Content
76%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 orchestration skill that respects token budget and lays out a clear sequenced workflow with completion checks. Its weakness is actionability: guidance is abstract process direction with no concrete commands, examples, or copy-paste code.
Suggestions
Add one or two concrete examples of an 'independent unit' and how it is delegated (e.g., a sample executor prompt or the exact agent invocation) to lift actionability.
Spell out the verify->fix->retry feedback loop explicitly in the Workflow or Completion section so error recovery is unambiguous.
Show the minimal command or check used to 'verify as you go' (e.g., running the affected test) so the step is executable rather than implied.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: short imperative lines, no explanation of basic concepts, and every section earns its place with no padding. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives clear directives but no concrete executable code or commands; guidance is procedural ('Break the work into independent units', 'delegate to executor agents') rather than copy-paste ready steps. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The numbered Workflow and Completion sections sequence steps with explicit checkpoints ('Verify as you go', 'Before claiming done: tests pass'), though recovery/feedback loops are implied rather than fully spelled out. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no bundle files, well-organized into labeled sections (Goal, Workflow, Scale, Rules, Completion, Output); the simple-skill exception applies and structure is clear. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |