Content
78%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 tight, well-structured maker/checker procedure with a concrete checklist, output template, and validation feedback loop. Its main weakness is mild redundancy between the Checklist and Rules sections and the lack of a worked example verdict.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence with no concept over-explanation, but the Rules section restates checklist items (e.g., 'Do not trust implementer's claim — run them' overlaps checks 3-4), a minor redundancy that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides a concrete checklist, a copy-paste-ready output template, and explicit rules; as an instruction-only skill the absence of code is acceptable, though no filled-out example verdict is shown. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear checklist with an 'all must pass for APPROVE' gate, explicit validation (run tests), and a feedback loop (REJECT with reasons + suggested next step); minor gaps in that checks are not strictly sequenced and recovery is handed off rather than internal. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, no external references needed, and well-organized into Inputs/Checklist/Output/Rules sections, meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |