Content
68%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 delivers concrete, executable guidance with a complete scaffold example and sharp Odoo-specific do/don't rules, organized into clear self-contained sections. Its weaknesses are the absence of any validation or verification steps in the workflow and minor content gaps (no ir.model.access.csv row or view XML example) that keep actionability just below fully copy-paste ready.
Suggestions
Add validation checkpoints to the workflow, e.g., 'After scaffolding, install the module and check the Odoo server log for loading errors; re-check after every manifest or model change' — including a fix-and-retry loop for module installation failures.
Include an example row for security/ir.model.access.csv (e.g., 'access_hospital_patient,hospital.patient,model_hospital_patient,base.group_user,1,1') since it is named in the scaffold but never shown, and users hit access errors without it.
Trim the user-marketing framing ('This skill transforms your AI into an expert...') and the 'How It Works' activation steps, which describe the user's interaction rather than instructing Claude.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient — a compact when-to-use list, one complete scaffold example, terse do/don't bullets, and a focused limitations section, with Odoo-specific conventions (manifest version format, snake_case requirement, ir.model.access.csv) that Claude cannot be assumed to know. Minor trimmable content exists ('This skill transforms your AI into an expert Odoo custom module developer' and the user-facing 'How It Works' activation steps add marketing framing Claude does not need), matching anchor 4 ('minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed') rather than anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The scaffold example provides copy-paste-ready content: a full folder tree, a complete 'Hospital Management' __manifest__.py, and an executable hospital.patient model class, plus concrete do/don't rules ('Always prefix your model _name with a namespace', 'Forget to add new models to ir.model.access.csv or users will get access errors'). Minor gaps keep it below anchor 5: no example row for security/ir.model.access.csv (only referenced in the tree and a warning), and no view XML example despite views being part of the scaffold. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | 'How It Works' lists a sequence (Activate → Scaffold → Review), but these are user-interaction steps, not the actual development workflow, and there are no verification checkpoints such as installing/upgrading the module, checking the Odoo server log for loading errors, or confirming access rights — matching anchor 3 ('steps listed but validation gaps; checkpoints missing or implicit'). It is not below anchor 3 since a rough sequence and explicit troubleshooting use case exist, and not above it because no validate-and-retry loop is described for any workflow. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/) exist, so the skill is a single self-contained SKILL.md; sections (When to Use, Examples, Best Practices, Limitations) are clearly headed and easy to navigate, and boundary pointers to other skills (@odoo-xml-views-builder, @odoo-automated-tests) are explicit. At ~96 body lines with full inline code examples, it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill case that would merit a 5, and some detail (e.g., the complete scaffold example or security file formats) could live in a reference file — fitting anchor 4 ('good structure; minor organization gaps') rather than anchor 5's optimally split content. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |