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 an exceptionally well-structured orchestrator: sequenced phases, explicit validation gates, feedback loops, and clean progressive disclosure into per-phase and per-provider files. The main weakness is reinforcement redundancy across the loop, Invariants, and pause sections.
Suggestions
State the must-fail-first gate and the CodeBug-vs-Upstream rule once in their canonical location and reference them elsewhere rather than restating them in the loop, Invariants, and When-to-pause sections.
The "When to pause and ask" list is long; consider moving the exhaustive conditions into a referenced file and keeping only the highest-frequency pause triggers inline.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Dense and free of concepts Claude already knows, but critical rules are reinforced redundantly — the must-fail-first gate and the "owned code is a CodeBug, not Upstream" rule each appear in the loop, Invariants, and When-to-pause sections — so it could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific guidance: exact field paths (conversation_config.agent.prompt.prompt), numeric thresholds (dataset_size 8, range 5–10, ≥ M of N gates), per-phase file links, and explicit stop conditions — fully actionable for an instruction skill. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Ten phases run in a strict sequence with hard pre-conditions, explicit must-fail-first and must-pass validation gates, and named feedback loops (drift rolls back to Apply; regression hands back to Collect; Eval→Collect loop), matching the score-3 anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep links into phases/ and providers/, a dedicated Files tree, and real references/ files — content is appropriately split and easy to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |