Content
75%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, token-efficient instruction skill: a complete output template, a clearly sequenced workflow, and explicit routing rules, with no padding or over-explanation. To reach top marks it needs an explicit validation checkpoint in the workflow and a small worked example to make the milestone placeholders concrete.
Suggestions
Add a validation step to the workflow before saving, e.g. 'Verify every week 1-12 has a milestone with a named DRI and observable definition of done, and that kill criteria from the decision are carried into the Kill Criteria Watch section.'
Trim the "Why 90 Days" rationale section and the "Where most decisions die" flavor line; Claude can infer the rationale, and these tokens compete with the template and workflow.
Include a two-row worked example of a filled Weekly Milestones entry (week, milestone, DRI, definition of done) to ground the "<observable outcome>" placeholder.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — an output template, a 7-step workflow, and short routing sections with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Minor trimming is possible (the "Why 90 Days" rationale bullets and the flavor line "Where most decisions die: between 'we decided' and 'what's next Monday?"), which keeps it at anchor 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete and executable: an exact save path (~/.claude/execution/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md), a complete fill-in markdown template with table structures, and a specific 7-step workflow. It stops short of anchor 5 because placeholders like "<observable outcome>" are never grounded with a worked example of a filled-in plan. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow section gives a clearly sequenced 7-step process (read decision → decompose → assign DRIs → milestones → cadence → risk register → save/notify) with cross-referencing of devil's-advocate concerns and kill-criteria routing. It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because there is no explicit validation step (e.g. verifying milestones align with the checkpoint date or that DRIs are real people) before saving. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is self-contained with well-organized sections (Pipeline Position, Input, Output Plan Format, Workflow, Routing, Related) and one-level links to related skills and an agent. It is over 50 lines, so the simple-skill exception to score 5 does not apply; the inline template is appropriately placed since it is the core deliverable, but the body could be modestly slimmed by moving detail out if the skill grew. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |