Content
88%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 an excellent operational reference: dense, non-obvious guidance with fully executable tool-call examples, a validated multi-step workflow with staleness feedback loops, and tight attention to failure modes (pagination, unattributed cypher results, filtered-context caveats). The only weaknesses are mild repetition of the repo-binding/staleness rules and tool-reference detail that could be split into a reference file if the skill grows.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence — no explanations of concepts Claude already knows; every section carries non-obvious operational detail (pagination of list_repos, cypher's missing repo hint, staleness semantics). Minor trimmable repetition (the repo-binding rule appears in four places, staleness in three) keeps it just below the lean anchor 5, but it is well above anchor 3's 'some unnecessary explanation'. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully concrete, executable tool calls with argument objects and expected outputs: query({search_query: "payment error handling", repo: "my-app"}), context({name: "validatePayment", ...}), trace({from: ..., to: ..., repo: ...}), a complete Cypher statement, and the terminal command node .gitnexus/run.cjs analyze. Filter parameters are given with concrete values (limit: 3, chain_depth: 0), and the worked example covers a common end-to-end case — copy-paste ready. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A numbered 0-4 workflow with an explicit feedback loop (staleness -> re-analyze only for behind/diverged), an error-recovery branch ("If 'Index is stale' → run node .gitnexus/run.cjs analyze"), stop-and-ask checkpoints for ambiguous repos, and validation requirements ("Read source files to confirm root cause", "Confirm source and tests before claiming a root cause") backed by a checklist and a full worked example. No destructive or batch operations, so no cap applies. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ absent), so the skill is a single ~155-line file; sections are clear, well-ordered, and navigable with no buried or nested references. The Tools section's per-call example outputs and the debugging-patterns table are borderline reference material that could live in a separate file, which is exactly the 'minor organization gaps' of anchor 4 rather than the misplacement of anchor 3. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |