Content
63%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.
This is a strong, disciplined analysis skill: phased workflow, concrete intake and output templates, and unusually good epistemic hygiene around significance, attribution, and benchmark sourcing. Its main weaknesses are a monolithic single-file structure with no progressive disclosure, and redundancy between the "When to Use", "Core principle", and "Examples" sections.
Suggestions
Split the ~100-line Phase 5 output-report template and the platform benchmark details into reference files (e.g. references/report-template.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview with one-level-deep references.
Remove the "Examples" section, which duplicates the "When to Use This Skill" trigger list almost verbatim, and trim the editorializing "Core principle" paragraph to its operative content.
Add one concrete executable artifact for the statistical check — e.g. a short Python/statsmodels snippet for the two-proportion test and sample-size calculation — since Phase 2D currently names methods without implementation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body avoids explaining basics Claude already knows and its tables are dense placeholder templates that earn their tokens, but the "Core principle" paragraph editorializes ("Most startup founders check their ad dashboard... either panic or celebrate") and the "Examples" section repeats the "When to Use" trigger list nearly verbatim. Mostly efficient with some unnecessary content that could be tightened — anchor 3. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill the guidance is highly concrete: an 11-item intake checklist, exact expected columns per platform, a funnel-adjusted CAC formula, a statistical-test spec with correct denominators ("Use impressions as the CTR denominator and clicks/sessions as the conversion-rate denominator"), and a complete fill-in report template. It falls short of anchor 5 only because the significance methods are named ("two-proportion test", "bootstrap") without any executable formula or code. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear Phase 0→5 sequence with numbered sub-phases and most checkpoints present: significance checks before actions ("Validate uncertainty, then run a bounded bid test"), pre-defined stop/rollback rules in scenarios, confirmation before writing the report file, and "Monitor reallocation" follow-up in the action plan. Not anchor 5 because there are no explicit validate→fix→retry recovery loops. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/) exist and the ~370-line body is a single monolithic file: the full output-report template, benchmark guidance, and duplicated example lists are inlined content that clearly belongs in one-level-deep reference files. Section headers give it reasonable structure, placing it at anchor 3 rather than 2, but it is far from the well-split structure of anchor 4-5. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |