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 content is concise and well-structured for a small instruction-only skill, with a clear sequenced workflow. Its main weakness is actionability: it stays at the level of directives rather than giving the concrete commands or ProteinMPNN flags needed to execute each step.
Suggestions
Add a concrete runnable example or the key ProteinMPNN command/flags for fixed and tied residues so step 1-4 are executable, not just descriptive.
Expand the design-filtering step with an explicit validation/feedback loop (e.g., re-predict structure, check diversity, retry on failure) since it is a batch operation.
Specify what 'verify the local or remote execution route' means concretely — the command or check to run — rather than leaving it as a directive.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what ProteinMPNN or a backbone is, and every line earns its place within ~13 lines. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is high-level and abstract ('Verify the local or remote execution route', 'Filter designs by constraints') with no concrete commands, flags, or a runnable ProteinMPNN invocation for tied/fixed positions; it describes more than it instructs. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence is present with verification built into steps 2 and 5, but the filtering step (a batch operation) lacks an explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loop, leaving a minor validation gap. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | At under 50 lines with no need for external references, the well-organized intro-plus-numbered-workflow structure meets the simple-skill exception for a top progressive-disclosure score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |