Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a tight, actionable troubleshooting reference with concrete code fixes per symptom and a verification step. The only mild gap is that the verify loop is described rather than prescribed as an explicit validation gate.
Suggestions
Make 'Verify the fix' an explicit numbered checklist with pass/fail criteria per symptom (e.g., '2. Re-run the second turn; FAIL if history still truncated') to strengthen the validation checkpoint.
Add a short ordering hint at the top (e.g., 'Match your symptom to a section below; if none match, inspect the wire stream') so the diagnostic workflow path is explicit before the symptom list.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean: each section is symptom → cause → 'Fix:' with code, assuming Claude's competence and explaining no general concepts, so every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Fixes are fully executable — 'UseFunctionInvocation(fic => fic.TerminateOnUnknownCalls = true)', the curl SSE command, and the RawEvent pattern match — copy-paste ready with specific API calls. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A 'Verify the fix' section gives a reproduce→confirm feedback loop, but the checkpoints are described loosely rather than as strict validation gates, leaving the sequence present but checkpoints somewhat implicit. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, so the single-task troubleshooting skill is well-organized into discrete sections; per the simple-skill note, well-organized sections score 3 without external references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |