Content
72%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 concise and well-structured for a simple skill, with a clear workflow and appropriate escalation to sibling skills. It is held back by actionability and workflow clarity, since the steps lack executable examples and explicit validation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Add a small concrete request/response or pseudo-code snippet so the 'build a minimal request' and 'validate response shape' steps are executable.
Make the validation checkpoint explicit (e.g., 'If the response shape does not match, do not proceed; record the error as evidence and retry or escalate').
Optionally surface the endpoint identity/auth fields to confirm as a short checklist to strengthen workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean, assumes Claude's competence, and contains no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor where every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps name what to do ('Build a minimal request', 'Validate response shape') but provide no executable code, command, or request-shape example, leaving concrete execution details missing per the some-concrete-guidance-but-incomplete anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered sequence is present, but validation checkpoints are implicit rather than explicit ('handle model errors as evidence'), matching the steps-listed-but-implicit-checkpoints anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A short, well-organized single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, qualifying for the simple-skill exception where well-organized sections score 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |