Content
78%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 content is a tight, well-structured instruction skill: a clear three-step workflow, concrete structural constraints, and a ready-to-use plan template, all within a compact self-contained body. Its only real weaknesses are a useless circular "When to Use" line and the absence of a worked example showing what a good output looks like.
Suggestions
Delete or rewrite the circular "When to Use" section — it restates nothing of value and wastes tokens; the frontmatter description already carries the trigger.
Add a brief filled-in example (or example snippet) of one plan item done well vs. poorly to anchor the "atomic, verb-first, concrete" rules.
Optionally add an explicit post-generation step (e.g. re-check that every action item is atomic and a validation item exists) to close the workflow's feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what planning is or why it matters, and every section carries instructions. The one trimmable piece is the circular "When to Use" sentence ("applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview"), which adds no information, fitting anchor 4 (efficient with minor instances that could be trimmed) rather than the fully lean anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is concrete and executable for an instruction-only skill: exact interaction limits ("at most 1-2 questions"), a fixed plan structure (Approach in 1-3 sentences, In/Out scope, "6-10 atomic, ordered tasks", a required validation item), verb-first rules, and a copy-paste markdown template. It misses anchor 5 only because there is no worked example of a filled-in plan to anchor quality. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The three-step workflow (Scan Context → Minimal Interaction → Generate Plan) is a clear, correctly ordered sequence, and it embeds a validation checkpoint by requiring "At least one item for testing" in the generated plan. This is not a destructive or batch operation, so no cap applies; it falls short of anchor 5 because the workflow itself has no explicit review/feedback step after plan generation. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is short and self-contained with clean section headers (Goal, Workflow, Plan Template, Checklist Guidelines) and no external references. Nothing here warrants splitting into bundle files, and per the rubric's simple-skill guidance, well-organized sections with no need for references merit a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |