Content
88%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 content is highly actionable and its workflow is cleanly sequenced with real validation/feedback checkpoints and a concrete exit condition. The only mild weaknesses are a little restated prose in the framing sections and a longer-than-needed single file that could split reference material into a sidecar.
Suggestions
Tighten the opening paragraph and 'What makes a criterion gradeable' so they don't restate the same 'separate context with no conversation' framing twice — fold the framing into one place.
Consider moving the worked one-criterion example and the anti-patterns list into a references/ file (e.g. RUBRIC_EXAMPLES.md) referenced one level deep, keeping SKILL.md as a sharper overview.
The closing one-liner and the 'Rubric < contract' section are load-bearing; ensure the closing one-liner step (Process step 8) names the exact string to print verbatim so it is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence (it never explains what markdown, a test suite, or an exit code is), and every section carries novel content. The opening paragraph and the 'Picture a separate context…' paragraph restate each other somewhat, leaving minor trimming opportunities rather than a fully lean surface. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | As an instruction-only skill it gives fully concrete guidance: an exact output-path table, a copy-paste rubric template, a worked one-criterion example, a vague→sharp table with five real examples, and a literal closing one-liner to print. Claude knows precisely what file to write, where, and in what shape. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The numbered 'Process' section sequences 8 steps with an explicit self-critique checkpoint (step 5) and a stop check with concrete exit conditions (step 6: '≥4 gradeable criteria across ≥2 categories AND the deliverable is unambiguous, OR the user explicitly says "ship it"'), plus an error-recovery branch (ask the user / write QUESTIONS.md when the source is too thin). | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets are absent) and the body references no external files; all content is inline in a single, well-sectioned SKILL.md. Sections are clearly headed and self-contained, but at ~120 lines some material (the vague→sharp table, anti-patterns, worked example) could plausibly live in a reference file, leaving a minor organization gap versus the top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |