Content
53%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 competently structured overview-plus-reference-index skill: one-line design principles, a verified 11-file reference layer, concrete clarifying questions, and a defined output shape. Its weaknesses are the absence of any explicit workflow ordering, output templates that stay at the label level, and a few padded sections (duplicated description, filler 'When to Use').
Suggestions
Add a short numbered workflow (check the context file → answer the Questions to Ask → consult the matching reference file(s) → produce the Output Format) so the sequence of steps is explicit rather than implied by section order.
Flesh out the Output Format with a concrete worked example or mini-template of the four-part answer, so 'Component recommendation -- which menu or button type and why' becomes directly usable guidance.
Delete the duplicated first paragraph and the auto-generated 'When to Use' filler section ('This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.') to reclaim wasted tokens.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean (one-line Key Principles, a compact reference table), but it re-states the frontmatter description verbatim ("Check for `.claude/apple-design-context.md` before asking questions..."), carries a filler "When to Use" section ("This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview."), and inlines generic cross-links that add tokens without guidance. These are unnecessary sections that could be trimmed, matching the 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation' anchor rather than the clearly-efficient level 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete decision rules exist ("Pop-up buttons for mutually exclusive choices", "Pull-down buttons for action lists") and the Questions to Ask are specific ("Which platforms?", "macOS menu bar app?"), but the Output Format entries are one-line labels ("Component recommendation -- which menu or button type and why") with no worked example or template, and there is no guidance on how to apply the 11 reference files to reach an answer. This is concrete-but-incomplete guidance, sitting at anchor 3 rather than the mostly-executable level 4. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The implied process (check context file → consult references → ask clarifying questions → produce the four-part output) is discernible from the sections, but the steps are never sequenced — the body never tells the reader in what order to use the Reference Index, the Questions, or the Output Format. It is not a destructive or batch operation, so no validation cap applies, but checkpoints are only implicit, matching anchor 3 ('steps listed but sequence/checkpoints missing or implicit') rather than anchor 4's explicitly ordered flow. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a genuine overview with a well-signaled, one-level-deep Reference Index table covering 11 topics with 'Key content' hints, and all 11 referenced files (menus.md, context-menus.md, dock-menus.md, edit-menus.md, the-menu-bar.md, toolbars.md, buttons.md, action-button.md, pop-up-buttons.md, pull-down-buttons.md, disclosure-controls.md) exist in references/. Minor organization gaps — the duplicated description line, the auto-generated 'When to Use' filler below the footer — keep it at anchor 4 rather than the fully-polished anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |