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 exemplar of lean, imperative skill writing with a clear workflow, guardrails, and verification requirements. Its only gaps are the absence of concrete example commands and unsequenced commit/push handling for the modes it advertises.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is fragment-style bullets ("inspect before editing", "do not widen a narrow fix into repo-wide churn") with zero concept explanations and no padding. Every token earns its place, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor; it is not 4 because there is no over-explanation to trim. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance: enumerated modes (inspect/fix/verify/push), an exact status vocabulary, and a copy-paste output format template. It is not 5 because it includes no example commands (e.g., git status/log invocations) for the inspection and proving steps it mandates. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 4-step sequence (resolve surface → read failing surface → keep fix narrow → report state) with explicit validation ("do not claim fixed until the proving command was rerun") and a Verification checklist. It is not 5 because the commit and push modes are offered as requested modes but never sequenced in the workflow steps. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A well-organized single-file structure with clearly labeled sections and no nested file references. It is not 5 because the Skill Stack references sibling skills by bare name without paths, and at ~105 lines with an output template, some material could be split into reference files. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |