Content
65%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 appropriately lean for a deprecation notice and well-structured for its size, but its redirect is vague — it tells Claude to avoid the skill without naming the concrete OMX surfaces or commands to use instead.
Suggestions
Name the specific maintained OMX trace/runtime inspection surfaces (tool or command names) so the redirect is actionable rather than a high-level hint.
Optionally add a one-line example of the canonical inspection invocation so Claude has a concrete fallback when trace evidence is needed.
Drop the inert 'Task: {{ARGUMENTS}}' placeholder, since a hard-deprecated skill should not present itself as accepting a task.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is two short sentences plus a task placeholder with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the "lean and efficient; every token earns its place" anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives a high-level redirect ("Use maintained OMX trace/runtime inspection surfaces") but no concrete commands, tool names, or steps, fitting the "minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps" anchor. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The deprecation directive ("Do not invoke or route this skill") is clear and unambiguous, but there is no real workflow sequence and the redirect target is underspecified, sitting between a clear single action and a vague sequence. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external references, and is cleanly organized under a single heading, so the simple-skill exception lets progressive disclosure score 5 with just well-organized sections. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |