Content
75%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 well-structured, actionable instruction skill with a clear step sequence and concrete commands for the common cases. Weaker spots are the high-level BI-tool and stakeholder-lookup steps and the lack of explicit verification checkpoints before reporting impact.
Suggestions
Add a verification checkpoint to the workflow (e.g., re-run `af dags source` against each discovered consumer to confirm the dependency tree is complete before categorizing) to strengthen workflow_clarity.
Make the vague guidance executable: replace 'Look for BI tool connections' with concrete checks (specific dashboard naming patterns to grep for, or a command/metadata query), and give a concrete source for dashboard owners rather than 'Usually in BI tool metadata'.
Tighten conciseness by removing one of the two ASCII dependency diagrams and trimming the illustrative example rows in the output tables to one row each.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is efficient and imperative with no basic-concept padding, but the duplicate ASCII diagrams (the Step 2 dependency tree and the Output impact diagram) and illustrative table rows could be trimmed. Mostly efficient with minor over-explanation fits anchor 4. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete executable guidance exists (`af dags list`, `af dags source <dag_id>`, the information_schema.view_table_usage SQL), but steps like "Look for BI tool connections" and "Dashboard owners: Usually in BI tool metadata" remain high-level hints. Mostly executable with minor gaps fits anchor 4. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-step sequence (identify consumers, build tree, categorize, assess risk, find stakeholders) is clearly ordered and ends in a defined output report, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., confirming the consumer search is exhaustive). Anchor 4 fits; anchor 5 requires explicit validation steps and feedback loops. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized with headers and no nested or broken references, and no bundle files exist so nothing points to missing files. However, at ~155 lines everything is inlined — the output-report template and criticality rubric could live in a reference file — and the under-50-line simple-skill exception does not apply, fitting anchor 4. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |