Content
36%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 lean, well-sectioned skeleton with sensible use/don't-use triggers, but it contains no actual screen-reader testing guidance — the Instructions are generic boilerplate, and the single reference that would carry the real content points to a nonexistent file. As written, the skill gives Claude nothing concrete to execute.
Suggestions
Replace the generic Instructions bullets with concrete testing steps, e.g., which screen reader and browser pairings to use, how to navigate by headings/forms/landmarks, and what announcements to verify for ARIA live regions and form errors.
Create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` (in the bundle's actual references location) or remove the broken reference so the pointer resolves to real content.
Add explicit validation checkpoints, such as 'record each announcement mismatch and re-test after the fix' or a pass/fail checklist per page, so the workflow has feedback loops.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is ~35 lines, lean, and free of explanations of concepts Claude already knows, matching 'Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'. Only the generic meta-instructions ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs') are trimmable filler, keeping it below anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The Instructions section is entirely abstract — 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes', 'Provide actionable steps and verification' — with no tool names, commands, test procedures, or examples; it describes rather than instructs, matching anchor 1. The only concrete pointer, the playbook reference, targets a file that does not exist in the bundle. | 1 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is only a rough generic pseudo-sequence (clarify goals → apply best practices → provide steps) with poorly defined steps and no concrete validation checkpoints for what is inherently a multi-step testing process, matching 'Rough sequence present but many gaps; steps poorly defined'. | 2 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section structure is clean and the reference is clearly signaled and one level deep, but the referenced file `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist in the bundle (no resources/ directory), so navigation to the detailed content the skill depends on is broken — structure present but organization incomplete. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 10 / 20 Passed |