Content
72%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 complete, executable CLI and TypeScript examples and good conciseness, but it inlines a large API reference with no progressive disclosure to separate files and lacks validation checkpoints around the batch index-update operation.
Suggestions
Move the bulk TypeScript API reference into a separate references/REFERENCE.md, leaving a concise quick-start and key examples inline in SKILL.md.
Add an explicit validation step after `index.update()` (e.g. run `/index status` or `index.getStatus()` and confirm `marketCount`/`ageMinutes` before proceeding).
Trim the generic "Best Practices" list or replace it with concrete guidance tied to the API (e.g. specific refresh-interval recommendations).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with executable examples and minimal concept-explanation padding; only the generic "Best Practices" tips and some CLI/API duplication could be trimmed. Not 5 because of that minor fluff; not 3 because it is largely efficient rather than noticeably verbose. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It provides copy-paste-ready CLI commands and complete TypeScript examples covering search, categories, discovery, index management, and single-market retrieval across the common cases. Fully executable with specific examples. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | `index.update()` and `/index update` are batch refresh operations, yet there is no validation/verification checkpoint (e.g. confirm status/stats after update); the content is a feature reference rather than a sequenced workflow. Per the rubric's batch-operation cap, workflow clarity cannot exceed 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, and the full TypeScript API reference (~100 lines) is inlined in SKILL.md where it belongs in a separate REFERENCE.md. Section headers provide structure, but content that should be split is inline with no one-level-deep references. Not 4 because nothing is split out; not 2 because the file is well-sectioned rather than minimally structured. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |