Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-structured, concise instructional skill with a clear sequenced workflow and explicit validation checkpoints. Actionability is the weakest dimension: guidance is concrete in direction but lacks specific quantitative or tactical parameters.
Suggestions
Add concrete tactical parameters to key steps (e.g. recommended fortification depth, cavalry detachment size as a fraction of force, interdiction cadence) to make guidance more directly actionable.
Specify measurable exhaustion/retreat indicators in the validation checklist so the counterattack trigger is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place (steps, decision points, outcomes, validation). | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Steps are clear but guidance is conceptual rather than executable — no concrete commands, parameters, or units (e.g. cavalry force sizing, supply-interdiction radius, siege duration). For a strategy skill this is acceptable instruction-only guidance but lacks specific actionable detail. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Six-step sequence is clearly ordered with monitoring gates ('Wait for enemy exhaustion') and a dedicated Validation section with three explicit checkpoints including feint-detection, matching the validate→fix pattern for risky decisions. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, no external references needed; well-organized into Overview, Steps, Decision Points, Expected Outcomes, and Validation sections — simple-skill case scoring 3 per scoring notes. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |