Content
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like a reference card or cheat sheet than actionable guidance for Claude. It lists categories and frameworks Claude already knows without providing the concrete templates, example outputs, or step-by-step workflows needed to actually produce research artifacts. The lack of executable examples (e.g., a sample research plan, example interview questions, a synthesis template) severely limits its utility.
Suggestions
Add concrete templates for key deliverables—e.g., a complete example research plan with objectives, methods, timeline, and participant criteria that Claude can adapt.
Include example interview questions with good and bad examples, showing proper open-ended probing technique vs. leading questions.
Define a clear end-to-end workflow: e.g., 1. Clarify research objectives → 2. Select method (with decision criteria) → 3. Create research plan → 4. Build interview guide → 5. Synthesize findings → 6. Produce deliverables.
Remove or significantly compress the methods table and analysis framework list, as these are general UX knowledge Claude already has; replace with specific guidance on how to help users choose between methods based on their constraints.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient with good use of tables and lists, but includes some information that is general UX knowledge Claude already possesses (e.g., what affinity mapping is, what A/B testing is for). The method comparison table adds marginal value since Claude knows these methods well. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides only high-level descriptions and categories rather than concrete, executable guidance. There are no example interview questions, no template for a research plan, no sample survey structure, and no specific instructions Claude can follow to produce any of the listed deliverables. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear workflow for conducting research end-to-end. The sections are disconnected lists (methods, interview structure, analysis, deliverables) without sequencing, decision points, or guidance on how to move from one phase to the next. No validation or feedback loops are present. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is organized into logical sections with clear headers, which is good. However, there are no references to supporting files, and the content sits in a middle ground—too shallow to be self-sufficient but doesn't point anywhere for depth. No bundle files exist to support deeper exploration. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |