Content
86%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.
The body is an exemplary router: lean, well-structured, with a clear decision table routing to six self-contained reference files and helpful disambiguation notes. The only mild gap is that validation/feedback loops and detailed executable steps live in the references rather than the body, which is appropriate for a router but leaves workflow clarity and actionability just short of full marks.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | A lean router body that assumes Claude's competence ("This skill is a router. Each customer task maps to a procedure file under references/. Read the matching reference in full before acting"), with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the routing notes add genuine disambiguation value rather than fluff. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, actionable routing via a decision table mapping goals to specific linked reference files plus a clear execution instruction ("Execute commands using the AWS MCP server when connected ... Fall back to the AWS CLI otherwise"), but the detailed executable steps themselves are delegated to the reference files, leaving minor gaps in the body. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The routing sequence is clear and unambiguous (identify goal -> match reference -> read in full -> follow its constraints and steps), but the body itself carries no validation checkpoints or feedback loops since those live in the per-task reference files. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A clean overview body points to six well-signaled, one-level-deep reference files via a goal-to-reference table; references are real, self-contained, and only cross-reference sibling files rather than nesting, matching the anchor for clear overview with easy navigation. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |