Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a concise, well-structured authoring spec with a clear sequenced workflow, QA checklist, and quality gates, plus concrete token definitions. Its main gap is actionability: the rules stay at an abstract directive level without concrete examples of authored output.
Suggestions
Add one or two concrete examples of an authored component rule (anatomy, states, token usage) so the guidance is copy-paste ready rather than purely directive.
Pair each 'Do' rule with a concrete 'Don't' example as the 'Example Constraint Language' section itself recommends, to make abstract rules tangible.
Show a short sample QA-checklist entry with pass/fail criteria to demonstrate the testable acceptance criteria the skill asks for.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and sectioned into tight bullet lists with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete grounding exists (color tokens like #DD614C, fonts, spacing scale 4/8/12/16/24/32, a 6-step workflow, and a required output structure), but the rules themselves are abstract directives ('preserve visual hierarchy', 'keep interaction states explicit') with no concrete authored examples to copy. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Guideline Authoring Workflow' gives a clear 6-step sequence backed by a QA checklist (step 6) and a 'Quality Gates' section with testable criteria, providing explicit validation checkpoints for an authoring task that is not destructive. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a single self-contained file with well-organized sections and no nested or broken references; no bundle files are present and none are needed, so navigation is straightforward. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |