Content
82%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 an exemplary lean, instruction-only skill: concrete decision tree, scaffold template, promotion criteria, and output standard with no filler. Its main gaps are the lack of runnable eval examples and an explicitly spelled-out validation feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and dense — headings, bullets, one table, and one fill-in template with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every section carries non-obvious, opinionated guidance, matching the top anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides a concrete harness template, a five-step decision tree, explicit promotion criteria ("at least two of these"), a per-work-type eval gate table, and an output standard checklist. Not a 5 because the eval-gate entries are generic descriptors (e.g., "Fixture transcript or seeded work item with expected routing") rather than runnable checks or commands. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence (decide via tree → scaffold template → run loop → extract skill → gate → handoff) is clear with explicit stop conditions ("Stop on failed gate, unclear ownership, or unsafe external action") and a validation step inside the loop. Not a 5 because the eval → fix → re-run feedback loop is implied rather than explicitly spelled out; no destructive or batch operations trigger the cap. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A self-contained single file with well-organized sections; the only referenced paths ("skills/<name>/SKILL.md") are output targets, not dangling bundle references. Not a 5 because at ~125 lines a portion (e.g., the harness template or eval gate table) could arguably be split into reference files, and no external navigation is provided. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |