Content
73%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 presents a well-sequenced, strongly gated facilitation workflow with genuine validation checkpoints and hard stops — the strongest aspect of this skill. Its weaknesses are repetition between the Purpose, Operating Mode, and Key Principles sections, a filler 'When to Use' section, and moderate length that could be tightened or partly offloaded to reference files.
Suggestions
Delete or rewrite the empty 'When to Use' section ('This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.') with real trigger conditions, and merge the dangling 'multi-agent-brainstorming' handoff paragraph into a proper section — this would raise both conciseness and progressive_disclosure.
Deduplicate content repeated across Purpose, Operating Mode, and Key Principles (e.g. 'One question at a time' and 'YAGNI ruthlessly' each appear twice), keeping each principle in exactly one place.
Add one short example of a well-formed multiple-choice clarifying question and a sample Decision Log entry to make the strongest instructions copy-paste ready and lift actionability toward 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The process guidance is mostly tight, but there is noticeable redundancy: the 'Operating Mode' section restates the Purpose, 'Key Principles (Non-Negotiable)' duplicates rules already stated in the steps ('One question at a time', 'YAGNI ruthlessly' each appear twice), and the closing 'When to Use' section is a contentless filler sentence. This matches anchor 3 (mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened) rather than 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The body gives concrete, executable directives throughout — 'Ask one question per message', 'Prefer multiple-choice questions', 'a concise summary (5-7 bullets)', 'Propose 2-3 viable approaches', sections of '200-300 words max', plus verbatim prompts to ask at each checkpoint. For an instruction-only skill this is mostly executable guidance with minor gaps (e.g. no example of a well-formed multiple-choice question), matching anchor 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly numbered 7-step process with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: a mandatory context review first, the Understanding Lock hard gate with a verbatim confirmation prompt ('Do NOT proceed until explicit confirmation is given'), incremental validation after each design section ('Does this look right so far?'), a mandated Decision Log, exit criteria with hard stop conditions, and 'Be willing to go back and clarify'. This matches anchor 5 (clear sequence, explicit validation steps, feedback loops, checklists). | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, so the body is evaluated on its own structure: clean section headers, a clearly signaled handoff to the 'multi-agent-brainstorming' skill, and no monolithic walls or buried references. However, at ~230 lines with self-contained checklists (non-functional requirements, decision log format) that could be split into reference files, plus an oddly placed dangling paragraph before 'When to Use', this matches anchor 4 (good structure, minor organization gaps) rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |