Content
71%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 well-organized, lean checklist that sequences six QA layers and defines clear pass/revise/fail outcomes. Its weakness is actionability: beyond the Playwright snippet, the layers describe what to check without giving commands or scripts (especially the ffprobe and frame-sampling steps). Adding executable ffprobe/ffmpeg commands and a remediation loop would make it fully copy-paste runnable.
Suggestions
Add concrete commands for the final-output layers, e.g., 'ffprobe -v error -show_format -show_streams -show_frames output.mp4' and an ffmpeg frame-sampling command for the motion check.
Specify how schema validation and static asset checks are performed (a validate script/command or the expected schema file paths).
Add an explicit remediation loop: on 'revise' or 'fail', fix the flagged layer and re-run the affected check before moving to the next layer.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows — it never explains what Playwright or ffprobe is. Minor trimming is possible: the Playwright snippet ('const browser = await chromium.launch()...') is largely boilerplate, and the Sources section links to docs for well-known tools, matching 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Only the browser-preview layer has executable code; layers like 'Schema validation: character design, rig plan, pose library, action timeline', 'Static asset checks: referenced parts and backgrounds exist', 'Motion check: compare sampled frames', and 'Final MP4 check: ffprobe metadata' are high-level directions with no commands, scripts, or file paths. This matches 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details' rather than level 4, where gaps would be minor. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The six numbered Review Layers give a clear schema-to-final-output sequence, each layer is itself a checkpoint, and the Pass/Revise/Fail section ('pass: technical checks pass, acting is readable' / 'fail: missing assets, blank render, runtime failure') defines outcomes. It falls short of level 5 because there is no explicit feedback loop telling the agent to fix and re-run checks after a 'revise' verdict, and per-layer pass criteria are loose (e.g., what counts as 'non-trivial differences'). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a single SKILL.md under 50 lines with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories) and no need for external references. Per the guideline for simple skills, well-organized sections (Review Layers, Playwright Pattern, Pass/Revise/Fail, Sources) merit a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |