Content
78%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 content is highly actionable with a complete, executable example and concrete API details, and it stays lean without over-explaining. Its main weaknesses are redundancy between the When to Use, Key Features, and Implementation Details sections, and orphaned bundle files (scripts/query.py, references/evaluation-checklist.md) that are never linked from SKILL.md.
Suggestions
Reference the bundle files from the body so they are discoverable: e.g., a '## Full query script' section pointing to scripts/query.py (including its natural-language-to-ontology-ID mapping) and a '## Validation checklist' section pointing to references/evaluation-checklist.md.
Trim the 'Key Features' section, whose bullets duplicate 'When to Use' and 'Implementation Details' content (e.g., 'No API key required', 'Faceted search for studies'), to reduce token cost.
Add brief guidance on handling empty search results and HTTP errors beyond the code's implicit checks, to give the workflow an explicit validation/recovery checkpoint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is efficient overall: a complete runnable example plus concrete endpoint details, with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Not 5 because the 'Key Features' bullets substantially duplicate 'When to Use' and 'Implementation Details' (e.g., 'No API key required (public endpoints)', 'Faceted search for studies'), which could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The Example Usage section is fully executable, copy-paste-ready Python covering search, facet inspection, and study-detail retrieval, and Implementation Details gives exact endpoint paths, facet syntax, and the size parameter. Not 4 because the common cases are all covered with concrete, runnable code. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The demo is a clear numbered sequence (search -> inspect facets -> fetch details) with checkpoints via raise_for_status() and defensive dict.get, and operations are read-only so no destructive-validation cap applies. Not 5 because explicit guidance for empty results or error-recovery feedback loops is only implicit in the code. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body itself is well-sectioned and appropriately sized for an overview, but the bundle contains scripts/query.py (with natural-language-to-ontology mapping not described in SKILL.md) and references/evaluation-checklist.md, neither of which is referenced or signaled anywhere in the body. Not 4 because completely orphaned bundle files are more than a minor organization gap; not 2 because the inline content is still well structured and self-sufficient for the core task. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |