Content
67%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured design guidance skill that efficiently covers 9 system experience types with clear principles and good progressive disclosure via a reference index. Its main weakness is limited actionability — it provides directional design principles but lacks concrete examples like sample widget layouts, notification payloads, or SwiftUI code snippets that would make the guidance immediately executable. The 'When to Use' section is generic boilerplate that adds no value.
Suggestions
Add at least 2-3 concrete examples: a sample SwiftUI widget view, a notification payload, or a Live Activity configuration to make the guidance actionable rather than purely directional.
Remove the generic 'When to Use' section at the bottom, which adds no information and wastes tokens.
Include a brief example in the Output Format section showing what a completed recommendation looks like for a specific use case (e.g., a food delivery app choosing between Live Activities and notifications).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is mostly efficient, providing concise principles per system experience type without over-explaining concepts Claude already knows. Minor verbosity in some principle descriptions (e.g., 'Deliveries, scores, timers, rides' is helpful but slightly padded), and the 'When to Use' section at the bottom is generic filler. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The skill provides design guidance principles and an output format, but lacks concrete, executable examples. There are no code snippets, no specific SwiftUI widget examples, no sample notification payloads, and no concrete before/after design patterns. The guidance is directional rather than copy-paste actionable. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The output format section provides a clear 5-step sequence for producing recommendations, and the 'Questions to Ask' section establishes a discovery phase. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. Since this is a design guidance skill (not destructive/batch operations), the missing validation is less critical, but the workflow could still benefit from a review/iteration step. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The reference index table is well-structured with clear one-level-deep references to 9 separate topic files, and the main SKILL.md serves as a proper overview. However, no bundle files were provided to verify the references actually exist, and the related skills section adds useful cross-references. Minor gap: the references paths cannot be validated. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |