Content
82%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.
The body is a concise, well-structured deprecation redirect that points to two concrete alternative commands with clear criteria. It scores strongly on conciseness and actionability, with only minor gaps in workflow clarity and progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient ('Hard-deprecated. Do not invoke or route this skill. Use `$code-review` directly...') with no padding or over-explanation, matching 'Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place'. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable commands (`$code-review` and `$plan --review`) for each case, matching 'Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps'; not a 5 because it is a redirect rather than full copy-paste guidance for a task. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The single redirect action is unambiguous with criteria distinguishing the two alternatives ('for implementation review' vs 'only when explicitly reviewing an existing planning artifact'); the simple-skill exception applies since it is not destructive, matching anchor 4 rather than 5 because the distinction could be sharper. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no external references needed and a single well-organized section, matching 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed'; not a 5 because there is only one plain paragraph rather than clearly signaled, multi-section navigation. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |