Content
82%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 concise and well-structured with actionable commands and a clear input format, functioning well as a simple skill. The main gaps are the absence of an input-validation checkpoint and external references that are not present in the bundle.
Suggestions
Add a brief validation step for the input JSON (e.g., required fields and point ranges) before invoking the scorer.
Bundle the referenced scripts under ./scripts/ and the skill reference under ./references/ so the paths resolve within the skill package.
Show one inline example of expected output so Claude knows what a successful run looks like.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: usage, input format, examples, script paths, and a skill reference with no concept over-explanation or padding. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete commands with argument syntax, a complete input-format JSON example, and script invocations are provided, but the actual execution logic lives in external scripts not shown inline. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The two commands (analyze, velocity) are unambiguous with clear args and output flags, but there is no input-validation or verification checkpoint before running. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized and external references are one level deep and clearly signaled, but the referenced scripts and skill file are not bundled locally alongside SKILL.md. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |