Content
92%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 highly actionable and well-structured, with concrete model IDs, templates, a scored feasibility gate, and clear per-archetype workflows including validation feedback loops. The only conciseness slack is an extraneous physics analogy that could be removed.
Suggestions
Remove the collider-process analogy line ('This is the MFA analogue of choosing a collider process and parameter scan before generating events.') to tighten conciseness toward the lean anchor.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Assumes Claude's knowledge of FBA/pFBA/FVA and stays dense and domain-specific, but the collider-process analogy ('This is the MFA analogue of choosing a collider process and parameter scan') is extraneous padding that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable artifacts — named model IDs (iJO1366, iMM904, Recon3D, iNJ661), per-archetype step sequences, required-metrics lists, paper-claim templates, a study_card.md template, a scored feasibility gate, and a ready-to-run first topic covering common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Each archetype has a numbered plan, and the Feasibility Gate ('Proceed only if total score is at least 18/25. Otherwise choose a simpler organism...') is an explicit validation checkpoint with a feedback loop; the study-card gate and AutoResearchClaw stage sequence add further checkpoints. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single-file, single-purpose skill with no bundle files, well-organized sections, no nested references, and all content (archetypes, templates, gates) appropriately inline — matching the well-organized-sections anchor for skills needing no external references. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |