Content
67%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.
A well-structured, information-dense skill body with an explicit 8-step workflow, concrete flags, file naming conventions, backup handling, and review gates. Its weaknesses are redundancy (file-structure and preset details repeated and duplicated into the reference bundle), a missing explanation of how the parameter-driven SVG renderer is configured, and two orphaned reference files that the body never surfaces.
Suggestions
State the output structure once and replace the 16-row preset and signal-mapping tables with a pointer to references/dimensions/presets.md (which already exists), keeping only the default and a few examples inline.
Document how scripts/generate_svg.py receives its parameters (which configuration file/area to write and its format) so the render step is executable without guessing.
Reference references/content-rules.md and references/modification-guide.md from the relevant workflow steps, or remove them from the bundle, so no reference files are undiscoverable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with skill-specific operational facts and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but it duplicates content: the output structure ("Output directory: slides-svg/", "Naming: NN-slide-[slug].svg") is stated three times (Key Features, Expected outputs, Output constraints), and the 16-row preset and signal-to-preset tables duplicate material that already lives in references/dimensions/presets.md and references/styles/<style>.md. This fits anchor 3 ("Mostly efficient but... could be tightened") rather than anchor 2, since there is no concept-explanation padding — only redundancy. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | CLI invocations are copy-paste ready ("/slide-deck \"...\" --style corporate", "python scripts/generate_svg.py") and workflow steps name concrete files, flags, and AskUserQuestion items. The gap: the renderer "does not use CLI arguments" and "reads parameters from its configuration area", but the body never states where or how those parameters are written, so the core render step is not fully executable from the skill alone. Anchor 4 ("Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps") fits; anchor 5 would require the render invocation to be complete. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 8-step workflow is clearly sequenced with conditional branches ("Stop if --outline-only", "If skip_prompt_review → skip to Step 7"), review gates in Steps 4 and 6, backups before overwriting, and a recovery loop ("Retry once on failure, then report error"). This batch/image-generation workflow does include validation elements, so the batch-operation cap does not apply, but the feedback loop is weaker than anchor 5's validate → fix → re-validate pattern (no diagnosis step, no verification that generated SVGs are valid), fitting anchor 4 ("most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps"). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are one level deep and every path cited in the body resolves to a real bundle file (references/analysis-framework.md, outline-template.md, base-prompt.md, layouts.md, design-guidelines.md, dimensions/*.md, all 16 styles/<style>.md, config/preferences-schema.md, scripts/generate_svg.py). Two gaps keep it at anchor 4 rather than 5: references/content-rules.md and references/modification-guide.md exist in the bundle but are never mentioned or navigable from SKILL.md, and the preset/signal tables inline content duplicated in the reference files instead of pointing to them. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |