Content
31%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 generic persona skeleton padded with tautological use/do-not-use sections. It has no runnable Haskell examples despite promising them, its Approach is principle-listing rather than a validated workflow, and its only progressive-disclosure pointer targets a nonexistent file.
Suggestions
Delete the boilerplate "Use this skill when" / "Do not use this skill when" / generic Instructions sections; they restate the skill name without adding information.
Add one or two complete, compilable Haskell snippets (e.g., a GADT modeling an invariant or a small Megaparsec parser) to back up the Output section's promises.
Fix the progressive-disclosure reference: either create resources/implementation-playbook.md with the detailed examples or remove the broken pointer, and add verification steps (compile with -Wall, run QuickCheck/Hspec) to the Approach workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Several sections are padded boilerplate that add nothing: "Working on haskell pro tasks or workflows", "Needing guidance, best practices, or checklists for haskell pro", "The task is unrelated to haskell pro", and generic instruction bullets like "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs" / "Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes". The Focus/Approach/Output lists are lean, but the tautological filler sections mark it as noticeably verbose. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | The body contains no code, commands, or examples despite an Output section that promises "Provide examples runnable in GHCi" and "Megaparsec/Aeson parsing examples". Guidance like "Use expressive types, newtypes, and invariants to model domain logic" is a high-level hint rather than an executable step, matching 'minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute'. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Approach section lists a 7-step sequence, but the steps are design principles rather than an operational workflow, and there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops (e.g., "compile with -Wall", "run the QuickCheck suite") to confirm correctness. Sequence present, checkpoints missing — the score-4 anchor requires most checkpoints present. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single external pointer ("open resources/implementation-playbook.md") is broken — no resources/ directory or bundle files exist, so navigation dead-ends. Combined with inlined generic filler that displaces structure, this matches 'minimal structure; references are buried/broken' more than the well-organized score-3 profile. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 9 / 20 Passed |