Content
78%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.
A compact, well-structured instruction skill with concrete, actionable guidance and a built-in validation checkpoint (the foot check). It would benefit from a numbered step sequence and an example of the actual GL MCP query format to push actionability and workflow clarity to the top anchor.
Suggestions
Number the workflow steps (build structure → tie each line to a cited GL query → run the foot check → emit the table + pass/fail) so the sequence is explicit rather than implied by section order.
Add one concrete example of the internal-gl MCP query (account + date range + journal-source filter) so the tie-out step is copy-paste ready.
Trim the opening 'Given an account...' line, which restates the frontmatter description and adds little beyond the Structure block.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean, well-organized body that assumes accounting competence; the opening restatement of intent slightly overlaps the description and could be trimmed, but otherwise efficient. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance: a labeled structure template with placeholders, a specific tool directive ('a GL query via the internal-gl MCP' with source filter) and an explicit foot-check formula; the exact MCP call shape is not given, leaving a minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear progression from structure → tie each line → foot check → output, with an explicit validation checkpoint ('The schedule must foot... surface it, don't plug it'); steps are implicit rather than numbered, so a 5 is not quite reached. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, with well-organized sections (Structure, Tie each line, Output) and no need for external references — meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |