Content
60%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 a well-structured, readable overview with a clear phase sequence, an explicit review gate, and concrete invocation and installation commands. Its main weaknesses are missing core process detail (the plan template and context-brief format are never shown), externalized references that leave the skill dependent on a GitHub repo, and mild promotional padding in the Key Differentiators section.
Suggestions
Show (or bundle) the actual plan template and one worked example of a step's 'self-contained context brief' so an executing agent has concrete output structure rather than only phase names.
Bundle key reference files locally (e.g. examples/small-plan.md, the template) instead of linking to GitHub, so the skill works offline and references are one level deep.
Trim the 'Key Differentiators' marketing section and the Overview that repeats the description verbatim, folding any operationally useful content (mutation protocol, fallback behavior) into the workflow steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient — phase list, usage examples, and a crisp ✅/❌ best-practices list — but includes unnecessary padding: the Overview repeats the frontmatter description nearly verbatim, and the 'Key Differentiators' section is promotional copy ('Zero runtime risk', 'Cold-start execution') rather than instructions. This matches anchor 3 (some unnecessary explanation that could be trimmed) rather than 4, since a whole marketing section is more than a minor instance. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance exists for invoking the skill ('/blueprint myapp "migrate database to PostgreSQL"') and installing it (git clone command), but the core deliverable process is only described at phase-headline level — 'Generates the plan from a structured template' without ever showing the template, step format, or what a context brief contains. This matches anchor 3 (some concrete guidance, key details missing); it is above anchor 2 because real, executable commands and examples are present, but below anchor 4 because the central instructions are absent. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five phases (Research → Design → Draft → Review → Register) are clearly sequenced, and 'Review — Delegates adversarial review to a strongest-model sub-agent' is an explicit checkpoint gate with a fallback behavior. It matches anchor 4 (clear sequence, most checkpoints present, minor validation gaps) rather than 5, which would require explicit validation steps and error-recovery feedback loops, and the skill involves no destructive or batch operations that would cap the score at 3. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well organized with clear headers, and the 'Additional Resources' section clearly signals where examples live — but those references are external GitHub URLs (examples/small-plan.md, large-plan.md) rather than bundled reference files, so the detailed material is unavailable to the agent reading the skill offline. This sits at anchor 4 (good structure, references mostly clear, minor gaps); it does not reach anchor 5's well-bundled one-level-deep references and is above anchor 3, since references are clearly signaled and the body is appropriately overview-sized. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |