Content
86%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 tight, well-structured instruction skill: every line carries skill-specific guidance, the output shape is unambiguous, and the sections map cleanly onto the template. The only notable gap is the absence of a worked example showing a filled-in PR body.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~50-line body is lean throughout: it assumes Claude's competence, never explains what a PR or library is, and every section (template, visual-form mapping, evidence rules, ADR test, triggers, output) carries only novel, skill-specific instruction. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete instruction-only guidance throughout — a copyable template, explicit evidence rules ('the exact check that failed before and passes after, quoted from the output itself'), and a three-question ADR decision rule with explicit outcomes. Minor gaps: placeholders like '<output / failing check>' are never filled with a worked example PR body. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Template fixes the sequence (Summary → Evidence → Reversibility) and the Sections elaborate each in order, with the ADR test acting as an explicit decision checkpoint. Not a 5 because assembly order is implied by section arrangement rather than stated, and there is no explicit feedback loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the body is under 50 lines with well-organized sections (Template, Sections, Triggers, Output), satisfying the simple-skill exception for a top score. References to CONTEXT.md and ADRs point to the project's paper trail, not nested skill files. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |