Content
71%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 a well-structured instruction-only skill with a clear ordered workflow, mandatory output structure, and excellent one-level reference integration. Its main weakness is redundant restatement of the same discipline rules across four overlapping sections, which inflates token cost.
Suggestions
Consolidate 'Core Function', 'Hard Rules', 'What This Skill Should Not Do', and 'Quality Standard' into a single concise rules block to remove redundant restatements of the same discipline principles.
Add one short worked example of the Section A–J output so Claude has a concrete template to mirror, boosting actionability to a 5.
Make the Step 8 self-critical review an explicit pass/fail rework checkpoint (review → fix → re-review) to strengthen workflow_clarity's validation loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient and free of irrelevant concept explanation, but the same discipline principles are restated across 'Core Function', 'Hard Rules', 'What This Skill Should Not Do', and 'Quality Standard', which is redundant padding that could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific guidance — an ordered 8-step execution flow and a mandatory output structure (Sections A–J) each listing exactly what to define — though no worked example output is included. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 8 steps are explicitly sequenced ('always run in order') with a self-critical review checkpoint in Step 8 and a clear output structure; minor validation gaps keep it just below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The reference modules are clearly signaled and one level deep, with a dedicated integration section mapping each of the 7 existing references/ files to specific output sections, giving easy navigation. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |