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.
A tight, well-structured skill body that delivers an actionable process and output template without padding. A worked example and an explicit verification checkpoint would push actionability and workflow clarity to full marks.
Suggestions
Add one short worked example (a real given/when/then case) in the Output format to make the template fully concrete.
Add an explicit validation step such as 'Review the plan against the change to ensure each case maps to a real risk before presenting.'
Consider listing a couple more trigger synonyms (e.g. 'regression cases', 'test coverage') in the description for broader activation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient, assuming Claude's competence without explaining what test plans or risks are; every line earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable guidance (a numbered process and a copy-paste output template) but the cases are framed as abstract given/when/then placeholders rather than a worked example, leaving a minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-step process is clearly sequenced with an implicit validation checkpoint (step 5 scopes the plan, and 'ask for the acceptance criteria before listing cases' guards unclear input), but it lacks an explicit verify-the-plan checkpoint. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | As a simple, under-50-line single-purpose skill with no need for external references, it is well-organized into Process and Output format sections, qualifying for the simple-skill exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |