Content
72%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-structured, concise protocol skill that defers detail to references and gives one concrete command, but its workflow lacks an explicit validation feedback loop and several steps remain abstract rather than executable, capping actionability and workflow clarity at 2.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validate→fix→retry loop around step 8 (`verify claims`): state what to do when verification reports a mismatch or a pending proposal failed to append, so the workflow_clarity destructive-operations cap lifts.
Provide a concrete query command or example for step 2 (e.g., the exact `registry-events.py` projection invocation or a sample `claims` projection read) rather than the abstract "Query `claims` projection by aggregate ID".
Show a minimal `proposal.json` skeleton inline or via a one-level reference so the `append claims <proposal.json>` command is copy-paste ready, lifting actionability toward 3.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and lean (Quick Start, Skill Contract, Data Sources, numbered Instructions) with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; assumes competence throughout, matching the level-3 'Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence' rather than the level-2 'could be tightened'. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Quotes a concrete command `python3 "$AARON_SKILLS_ROOT/scripts/registry-events.py" append claims <proposal.json>` and `verify claims`, but core steps like "Query `claims` projection by aggregate ID" (step 2) and proposal.json construction are described abstractly without executable code, matching level-2 'Some concrete guidance but incomplete ... missing key details' rather than fully copy-paste-ready level-3. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered sequence (steps 1-8) with a 'Done when' checklist and a step-8 `verify claims` checkpoint exists, but the workflow performs destructive/batch operations (reject proposals, owner upsert, tombstones) without an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop, so per the destructive-operations cap it stays at level-2 rather than level-3. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The SKILL.md is a clean overview (Quick Start, Skill Contract, Reference Materials, Next Best Skill) deferring detail to well-signaled one-level-deep references; the local bundle file `references/claims-ledger-schema.md` is real and linked inline, matching the level-3 'Clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references' rather than the level-2 'content that should be separate is inline'. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |