Content
65%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 a dense, mostly lean API reference: one real code snippet, exact behavioral specifications (defaults, fallback orders, error conditions), and no filler explanation of known concepts. Its weaknesses are the absence of any ordered workflow or validation checkpoints, and a ~40-symbol inline API enumeration that duplicates the API docs the skill itself cites.
Suggestions
Trim the "Relevant API Surface" bullet to the audio-relevant symbols (e.g. the client and speak/streaming types) and point to `API.md` / `axir-api.json` for the full surface, instead of inlining ~40 symbols that duplicate the cited docs.
Add a short ordered workflow for the common path — start from a no-key example to check request mapping, then only run `provider-api` examples once credentials are confirmed — with an explicit validation checkpoint between the local check and the live call.
Include a minimal runnable `speak()` snippet alongside the client-creation Core Pattern so the skill's primary task is copy-paste ready rather than only a signature ("AIClient::speak(request, options)").
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with package-specific facts Claude cannot know ("`speak()` returns TypeScript's speech result keys: `data` (base64 audio), `format`, `mimeType`, `transcript`", defaults like "OpenAI defaults to `gpt-4o-mini-tts` with the `alloy` voice") and never explains concepts Claude already knows. Not a 5: the "Relevant API Surface" bullet enumerates ~40 symbols, many unrelated to audio ("AxBalancer", "AxMeter", "AxTracer", "ProviderRouter"), which do not earn their place in an audio skill. Not a 3: beyond that one enumeration there is no padded or unnecessary explanation. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The Core Pattern is real, copy-pasteable C++ ("#include \"axllm/axllm.hpp\"" / "axllm::ai(\"openai\", { {\"apiKey\", std::getenv(\"OPENAI_API_KEY\")} })"), and behavioral specs are exact, e.g. a JSON body "is read from `audio_data`, `audioData`, `data`, `audio.data`, `output.audio.data`, or a Gemini part's inline data". Not a 5: only one short snippet is shown — `speak()` appears only as the signature "AIClient::speak(request, options)" and runnable examples live in `examples/` rather than being shown for the common cases. Not a 3: the code given is genuine executable C++, not pseudocode, and the defaults/fallbacks are fully specified. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | An order is implied by the Guardrails ("Start from package examples for exact native syntax before inventing a new call shape") and by When To Use separating "no-key examples for deterministic local checks" from "live provider calls behind explicit credentials", but no explicit step sequence exists and validation checkpoints are absent. Not a 4: no checkpoints or feedback loops are stated anywhere. Not a 2: the guidance that exists is concrete and coherent, not poorly defined. No destructive or batch operations are involved, so the workflow-clarity cap at 3 for missing validation does not apply, but the level is the natural fit. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | External materials are clearly signaled in Package Facts ("Package API docs: `API.md` and `axir-api.json`", "Runnable examples: `examples/`", "Capability manifest: `axir-capabilities.json`"), all one level deep with no bundle files present. Not a 4: the ~40-symbol inline "Relevant API Surface" enumeration duplicates the cited API docs — content that should live in a separate file is inline, which is more than a minor organization gap. Not a 2: the body is well-sectioned and references are clearly surfaced, not buried, so structure is more than minimal. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |