Content
78%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-only skill with clear sequencing and a verification section. The main gap is the absence of an explicit validate-and-retry feedback loop, which would lift workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add an explicit feedback loop to the Verification section (e.g., 'If a tier is missing or a funding source is undeclared, revise the reward table and re-verify') to earn a workflow_clarity of 5.
Tighten the Overview and Expected Outcomes sections to remove restatement of what the Steps already convey, improving conciseness.
For actionability, consider adding a concrete example of the proportional scaling rule for defections (e.g., a sample calculation for a 5,000-man surrender) so the scaling guidance is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean lists and tier tables that assume Claude's competence; the Overview sentence and Expected Outcomes add light restatement that could be trimmed, but no concept-explanation padding. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific guidance — exact amounts ('5000 jin gold, 10,000 household fief'), explicit multipliers ('Double standard military regulations'), and graduated scaling — though as a design framework it stops short of copy-paste-ready procedure. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–5 are clearly sequenced and a Verification section provides explicit checkpoints, but it lacks an error-recovery feedback loop (validate → fix → retry), which keeps it below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no external references and no bundle files; sections (Overview, Steps, Decision Points, Expected Outcomes, Verification) are well-organized, satisfying the simple-skill exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |