Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with an excellently sequenced, validation-rich workflow, but it suffers from internal repetition and a broken external reference. Tightening the redundancy and providing the missing report-template.md would raise the conciseness and progressive-disclosure scores.
Suggestions
Consolidate the duplicated cat-file list and the repeated 'read files before writing' / hyperlink rules into a single stated rule referenced once, instead of restating them across Phases 6, 7, and the Appendix.
Ship the referenced report-template.md in a references/ directory (or inline only the essential Chart.js helper signatures) so the signaled one-level-deep reference resolves.
Consider splitting the long Appendix source-derivation formatting rules and the per-file CSV schema examples into a separate reference file to slim the main SKILL.md overview.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Core procedural content (MCP calls, CSV formats, formulas) earns its tokens, but there is notable redundancy: the cat-file list is duplicated in Phase 6 and Phase 7, the hyperlink rule is restated three times, and the 'read files before writing' mandate appears in three places. Not a 1 because it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows; not a 3 because the repetition could be consolidated. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready guidance — exact MCP calls with parameters, concrete CSV formats with sample rows, explicit file paths, spelled-out formulas, and ready HTML snippets. Not below 3 because nothing is left as pseudocode or abstract description. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A strongly sequenced 8-phase workflow with a dedicated Phase 6 verification step (cross-checks for segment y/y, return base dates, multi-step calculations) and a blocking Phase 7 prerequisite plus a file-verification checklist. Not a 2 because batch/data operations have explicit validation and feedback loops rather than gaps. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle exists, yet the body references report-template.md for the HTML template; that file is absent, so the one signaled reference is a dead end. The 525-line body is effectively a monolith with long inline appendix-formatting and CSV specs that could be split out. Not a 1 because sections are well-headed and the reference is correctly one-level-deep and clearly signaled; not a 3 because the referenced file is missing and the overview is not concise. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |