Content
76%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.
A highly actionable, well-structured command reference with executable examples throughout; its main gap is the missing validation feedback loop for the destructive `--fix` operation, which caps workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add an explicit verify step after `--fix`, e.g. re-run `npx ecc-agentshield scan` and review the diff before committing, to establish a scan → fix → re-scan feedback loop.
Move the '結果の解釈' severity/findings tables into a references file and link to it from SKILL.md to tighten the overview and lift progressive disclosure.
Clarify that `--fix` only applies autofixable changes and that manual findings require review, so the destructive-flow boundary is explicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — tables, fenced command blocks, and short lists — and avoids re-explaining concepts Claude already knows; only the '結果の解釈' reference tables add mild explanatory bulk that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Commands are concrete and copy-paste ready across all common cases (basic scan, --path/--min-severity/--format flags, --fix, --opus --stream with API key export, init, and a GitHub Action YAML), fully executable with no placeholders. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Opus pipeline is sequenced (1-2-3) but the `--fix` flow auto-applies changes to config files with no validation/re-scan checkpoint, and the destructive/auto-fix cap prevents scoring above 3 despite the otherwise clear command reference. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is organized into clearly headed sections (起動タイミング, スキャン対象, 使用方法, etc.) with appropriate inline command reference and one-level external links to GitHub/npm; no bundle files exist, and most content is correctly inline, with only minor organization gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |