Content
77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A thorough, highly actionable legal workflow with strong sequencing and validation gates, but it is verbose in places and ships as a single large file that could offload detail to references.
Suggestions
Trim motivational/rationale prose (e.g., the "Facts happen in order…" intro and "Why a gate and not just a warning" block) to the essential rule, keeping the gate behavior without the justification paragraph.
Move the full output-format template and the marker-discipline / privilege-doctrine detail into reference files (e.g. references/output-template.md, references/privilege.md) and link them one level deep from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.
Consolidate the repeated provenance-tagging rules (Step 2 "Source attribution", "Tagging reaches every section…") into a single canonical list to reduce redundancy.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient and domain-specific, but motivational framing ("Facts happen in order… garbage-in, garbage-out") and rationale blocks ("Why a gate and not just a warning…") pad the prose and could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete file paths, per-source extraction formats, enumerated tag values (🔴/🟡/⚪, priv: ok/flag/review), and a full copy-paste output template give fully executable instruction-only guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 0–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates (privilege gate, conflicts gate), stop-and-ask feedback loops, SME-VERIFY flags, and a confirm-before-finalize checkpoint for this batch extraction operation. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the ~280-line SKILL.md is monolithic, with the output template, privilege doctrine, and marker discipline kept inline rather than split into one-level-deep reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |