Content
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured skill that clearly defines its purpose, stance, and relationship to adjacent skills (Sound, Explore, Prioritize). Its main weakness is that it delegates most actionable detail to referenced files while the body itself remains more conceptual than executable — there are no concrete examples of critique findings, severity ratings, or a step-by-step session walkthrough. The progressive disclosure is excellent, but without the bundle files to verify, the actual actionability depends heavily on those references.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example of a critique finding with severity rating and the expected artifact structure, so Claude can act without needing to read references/critique.md first.
Include an explicit numbered workflow for running a critique round (e.g., 1. Select perspective, 2. Examine artifact, 3. Rate findings by severity, 4. Check coverage, 5. Decide whether another round adds value).
Tighten the 'How Critique Differs from Sound' section — the distinction could be conveyed in 2-3 sentences rather than a full paragraph with repeated restatements.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary elaboration, particularly the extended comparison between Critique and Sound which, while useful, could be tightened. The explanation of stance ('adversarial but constructive') is somewhat verbose for what could be a single sentence. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides conceptual guidance on what critique does and when to transition, but lacks concrete examples of critique findings, severity ratings, or sample outputs. The actual execution details are deferred to references/critique.md, leaving the SKILL.md itself more descriptive than instructive. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is implied — run rounds, produce artifacts, track coverage, stop at diminishing returns — but there's no explicit step-by-step sequence with validation checkpoints. The persistence section describes artifact creation and status updates but doesn't sequence them clearly. The transitions section is well-structured but is about what happens after critique, not during. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill effectively references multiple supporting files (references/critique.md for the full conversation guide, ../artifacts/critique.md for schema, ../artifacts/assumption.md for promotion flow, ../artifacts/model.md and guidelines.md for context) with clear signals about what each contains. References are one level deep and well-organized. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |