Content
86%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 body is a lean, well-organized, repo-specific guide with concrete code templates and a clear sequenced checklist including a verification step. Its main gaps are the unspecified argument-parsing detail in the routing template and the absence of an error-recovery loop around verification.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~47-line body is lean and assumes competence: every section (checklist, pattern table, import note, history) conveys repo-specific knowledge with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides real file paths, a routing template, a help-text snippet, and a pattern table, but the routing block leaves '// parse args, call function' unspecified and uses <name> placeholders, so it is a template rather than copy-paste ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1-4 are clearly sequenced with an explicit verify checkpoint ('Verify both exist — the recurring bug is doing step 1 but missing steps 2-3'), but there is no error-recovery feedback loop and the verify step does not state how to check. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single task, no external references needed, and the content is organized into clear sections (checklist, patterns by command type, import pattern, history), which the simple-skill guideline scores as 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |