Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A concise, well-structured procedural skill with clear sequencing and an explicit verification checklist. The main gap is actionability: several steps read as abstract tactical doctrine rather than concrete, executable direction.
Suggestions
Tighten abstract steps into concrete directives — e.g., replace "Use weather to advantage" with a specific trigger/action such as "When a dust storm or darkness reduces visibility, extend the wagon-circle wings to envelop the enemy flank."
Add concrete numbers or decision criteria where vague (e.g., define what "conditions shift" means before launching the counterattack, and the sortie size/probe cadence).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean bullet-pointed procedure with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line carries an actionable step. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Steps are concrete in places (e.g., "5,000 riders", "circular formation") but several are high-level doctrine ("Extend wings to envelop enemy", "Use weather to advantage") rather than precise, executable guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced 1–6 process with an explicit Verification checklist (perimeter gaps, force positioning, weather/terrain exploitation); validation is present rather than missing. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, no external references needed, and organized into clear Overview / Steps / Expected Outcome / Verification sections. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |