Content
75%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, actionable rule catalog with a clear review workflow and good sectioning, assuming Claude's competence throughout. It is held back only by minor redundancy and the lack of an explicit verification checkpoint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with rule-specific checks and assumes Claude's competence (no explaining what React/CSS/tokens are); minor redundancy between the intro scope statement and the 'Do NOT report' section keeps it just shy of fully lean. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is highly concrete — specific paths (apps/app/src/**), named primitives, exact anti-patterns (<div onClick>, CardDescription under CardTitle), and a grep command — with only minor gaps; absence of code is fine for this instruction-only review skill. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequence exists (read DESIGN.md first → scope to changed user-facing lines → apply rule groups → use the report format), with a 'zero findings is valid' guardrail; only minor validation/checkpoint gaps remain. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-sectioned (What to check, Do NOT report, Report format) with no nested or buried references and no bundle files needed; being a self-contained ~100-line file rather than a <50-line simple skill keeps it at good-but-not-exemplary organization. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |