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.
The body is well-structured and concise, with a clear sequenced pipeline and good progressive disclosure to verified reference files. Its main weakness is actionability, since core execution details rely on reference files and a missing template rather than inline executable steps.
Suggestions
Add a small inline executable example or minimal config snippet in Quick Start so the skill is usable without first opening every reference file.
Either add the referenced 'templates/literature-push-template.md' to the bundle or remove the dangling reference to avoid a broken navigation pointer.
Include an explicit validate→fix→retry loop in the body for the score-arithmetic and delivery steps to strengthen workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is largely lean, using an ASCII diagram, tables, and bullets without explaining concepts Claude already knows, though a few editorializing sentences ('Not just search for papers...') could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Quick Start gives concrete user prompts and a cron example, but pipeline internals lack copy-paste code or commands, and key steps defer to reference files and a missing config template rather than directly executable guidance. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-stage SEARCH→FILTER→READ→DELIVER→ARCHIVE sequence is clearly laid out with validation safeguards (score validation, triple de-dup, graceful degradation), though explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loops are not detailed in the body. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a clear one-level-deep overview pointing to six real reference files via well-signaled tables, but it also references a non-existent 'templates/literature-push-template.md', leaving a minor organization gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |