Content
86%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.
A lean, well-structured instruction-only skill body with a coherent step sequence, concrete required artifacts, and a properly signaled one-level-deep reference. The only meaningful gap is the absence of explicit validation/review checkpoints and classification criteria in the instructions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~40-line body contains no explanations of DDD concepts Claude already knows; sections like "Use this skill when", "Instructions", "Required artifacts", and "Limitations" each earn their place with lean phrasing. Every token is load-bearing, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | As an instruction-only skill, concrete directives ("Extract domain capabilities and classify subdomains", "Capture context boundaries in ADRs") plus a named deliverables list ("Subdomain classification table", "Bounded context catalog") and a real template reference make the guidance mostly executable. It falls short of 5 only because classification criteria (core vs. supporting vs. generic) and other how-to details are left implicit. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The four instructions are clearly sequenced (classify, bound, define language, record ADRs) and "Required artifacts" functions as an output checklist. It is not a 5 because no explicit review/validation checkpoint exists (e.g., confirming the glossary with stakeholders), though the non-destructive design nature means no cap applies. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is under 50 lines with well-organized sections and a single clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ("If detailed templates are needed, open references/strategic-design-template.md") that exists on disk. Structure and navigation match the clean-overview anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |