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 minimal, well-structured wrapper that delegates cleanly to a slash command with no wasted tokens. Its only real weakness is that it offloads all operational detail to the slash command, leaving minor gaps in actionability and an absent completion-checkpoint.
Suggestions
Add a one-line note on what to pass to `/review` (e.g. the artifact path or draft text) so the entry action is fully specified.
Add a brief completion checkpoint, e.g. confirm the structured review is written to `outputs/` and covers the expected critique dimensions before finishing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is four lean lines with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the one cautionary note ("do not try to read a relative prompt-template path") earns its place, matching the lean score-5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives a concrete executable instruction ("Run the `/review` workflow") plus the agents and output location, but delegates all substantive guidance to the slash command, leaving minor gaps about arguments or what the critique should cover, so it is not the fully-specified score-5 level. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The single action is unambiguous and the output destination is stated, but there is no checkpoint or validation that the critique is complete before writing to `outputs/`, which keeps it below the explicit-validation score-5 anchor even under the simple-skill exception. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external references (no references/scripts/assets exist), and is organized into a clear heading plus labeled fields, satisfying the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |