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 compact, well-structured review skill that delivers concrete paths and a sequenced workflow without over-explaining. Adding an explicit validation feedback loop and one example manifest would lift actionability and workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add a short "If a check fails: report it, then re-run the relevant check after the fix" loop to make the workflow's validation explicit.
Include one minimal valid `plugin.json` snippet so the manifest-validity step has a concrete reference to compare against.
Specify how to run the JSON parse check (e.g., `python -m json.tool .cursor-plugin/plugin.json`) to make the first workflow step executable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: concrete file paths and checks with no padding or explanation of what manifests or plugins are. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete paths (`.cursor-plugin/plugin.json`, `skills/*/SKILL.md`, `hooks/hooks.json`) and explicit criteria (lowercase kebab-case name) make the guidance actionable, though it lacks any executable command or example manifest snippet. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence is paired with a Checklist that acts as a validation checkpoint, but there is no explicit fix-then-reverify feedback loop for failed checks. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with well-organized sections (Trigger, Workflow, Checklist, Output) and no need for external references, satisfying the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |