Content
90%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 dense, highly actionable review playbook with concrete commands, templates, and a clear routed workflow. It is concise and executable; the main gap is that the referenced per-lens prompt files are not bundled alongside SKILL.md.
Suggestions
Bundle the six reference/<lens>.md files (service-steward, error-tripwire, doc-drift-check, harness-map, boundary-keeper, straight-line-pass) inside the skill so the one-level-deep references resolve within the bundle.
Add one explicit validation checkpoint in Diff intake (e.g., confirm scope is resolved and non-empty before routing) to push workflow_clarity to the top anchor.
Consider a short "When NOT to use" note to sharpen distinctiveness against general code-review skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and information-dense: it assumes Claude's competence (no explanations of what Go/Vue/Rego/proto are) and every table, command list, and template earns its place rather than padding context. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready executable commands (git status/diff, gh pr diff, make test-only, go test ./path/...), a concrete lens-launch prompt template with placeholders, and a full report scaffold covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear Diff intake → Lens routing → Execution (two-wave) → Aggregation sequence with quality gates (required finding fields, Open checks, re-run after fixes); a couple of explicit pre-proceed validation checkpoints are only implicit, keeping it just short of the top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized overview with one-level-deep lens references clearly signaled in a catalog table, but the referenced reference/*.md files are not present in the provided bundle, so resolution cannot be confirmed and the body is fairly dense. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |