Content
42%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 well-organized and covers the domain thoroughly, with useful wireframe templates and a concrete output specification. However, it is a monolithic 575-line file whose bulk is generic best-practice and experiment-idea lists Claude could generate itself, with placeholder-only examples and no explicit step-by-step workflow tying assessment to deliverables.
Suggestions
Move the Experiment Ideas, Common Patterns by Business Model, and Mobile Paywall Patterns sections into reference files (e.g., references/experiments.md, references/business-models.md) and keep SKILL.md as a lean overview that links to them.
Replace placeholder wireframes with at least one fully worked example containing real copy, and supply actual benchmark numbers in the Metrics Plan instead of deferring them.
Add an explicit step-by-step workflow (1. Establish context via the assessment questions, 2. Select trigger points, 3. Produce paywall designs per Output Format, 4. Define metrics plan) so the sequence from assessment to deliverable is unambiguous.
Trim generic best-practice bullets that restate common knowledge (e.g., checkout basics like 'Minimal fields', 'Multiple payment methods') to reduce token cost.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~575-line body is dominated by generic CRO best-practice bullets Claude already knows ('Minimal fields', 'Multiple payment methods', 'Clear pricing display') plus a ~150-line Experiment Ideas brainstorm list. Padding is the majority of the file rather than incidental, matching the 'noticeably verbose; several padded sections' anchor. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | The wireframe templates and the Output Format section are concrete deliverable definitions, but the wireframes are placeholder skeletons ('[Specific capability]', '$X/mo') with no worked example of real copy, and no actual benchmark numbers despite the Metrics Plan promising 'expected benchmarks'. Skeleton-level guidance with missing key details. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A sequence exists implicitly (Initial Assessment → ask the listed questions if needed → design paywalls → deliver per Output Format → metrics plan), but it is never explicitly sequenced as a process and there are no validation or verification checkpoints. The sequence is present but checkpoints are implicit. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist; everything is inlined in a 575-line SKILL.md. Section headers and navigation are well organized (better than the anchor-2 'minimal structure' case), but content that clearly belongs in separate reference files — Experiment Ideas (~150 lines), business-model patterns, mobile patterns — is inlined, matching the 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 11 / 20 Passed |