Content
75%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 efficient, actionable, and well-structured: concrete code, a model-tier routing map, a feedback-loop eval process, and a checklist-style classification table. It consistently sits just below excellent because of small trimmable redundancies, missing templates for the vaguer directives, and a long inline deep-dive section that could be split into a reference file.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Sections are lean and directive (e.g. 'Haiku: classification, boilerplate transforms, narrow edits'; the 15-minute unit rule), assuming Claude's competence. Minor trimmable instances remain: 'Redact secrets and private document data before logging or sharing' states a generic norm Claude already knows, and the closing paragraph on writes/retries is redundantly worded. Efficient with minor over-explanation, not fully lean. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides an executable JavaScript adapter (with its illustrative nature explicitly justified: 'Replace this adapter with the actual tool's contract'), a concrete model-tier mapping, specific tracked cost fields, and an expected-classification table. Mostly executable guidance with minor gaps — no template or example for defining completion criteria, capability evals, or failure signatures. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Eval-First Loop is a clear baseline → execute → re-run → compare feedback loop, and the tool-result section gives an ordered three-boundary check with a recovery policy for writes and batch failures. Minor validation gaps: no explicit recovery step when eval deltas regress, and the overall flow across sections (decomposition → routing → sessions → evals) is presented as parallel lists rather than one sequenced workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized with clear section headers, no buried references, and no bundle files to navigate (none exist). The ~75-line tool-result interpretation procedure with code and table is deep-dive content that could arguably live in a separate reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a leaner overview — a minor organization gap that keeps it below the top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |