Content
93%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.
An exemplary concise, project-specific ruleset: every line encodes team knowledge Claude would otherwise get wrong, with a concrete naming convention and a final verification step. The only gap is the absence of an error-recovery loop should `./mvnw verify` fail.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every rule conveys project-specific knowledge Claude cannot infer (UTC timestamp naming to avoid branch collisions, Flyway checksum validation failure on edits, two-release destructive changes, ddl-auto=validate/none) with no padding and no explanation of known concepts, matching the lean anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully concrete: an exact naming template (`V<yyyyMMddHHmm>__<what_it_does>.sql`), the exact config key `spring.jpa.hibernate.ddl-auto` restricted to `validate` or `none`, and the command `./mvnw verify` — specific executable direction covering the common cases, matching anchor 5 for an instruction-only skill. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The rules form a clear sequence ending in a validation checkpoint ("Run `./mvnw verify`" with explicit handling when Testcontainers tests exist vs. absent), so the destructive-operation cap does not apply; however there is no fix-and-retry feedback loop if verification fails, fitting anchor 4 rather than anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, self-contained with no external references needed, and well organized as a numbered rule list, so per the rubric's simple-skill note it scores 5 with well-organized sections. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |