Content
51%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 maximally token-efficient but severely underdeveloped: one underspecified instruction with no location for the referenced run record, no follow-up debugging steps, and no validation checkpoints. The conciseness is admirable, but the skill leaves Claude unable to actually execute the task.
Suggestions
Specify where the run record lives and how to retrieve it, e.g., a concrete path or command, so the single instruction is executable.
Add the subsequent debugging steps (locate the failing step, identify the error, apply a fix) with explicit validation checkpoints so the implied sequence becomes real.
Briefly state what to look for in the run record (error codes, failed stage, timestamps) to make the guidance concrete rather than a bare hint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body ("Read the run record first.") is a single lean line with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — every token present is doing work, cleanly matching anchor 5 ("Lean and efficient; every token earns its place"). Its underspecification is penalized under actionability and workflow_clarity, not here. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | "Read the run record first" is a directive but gives no path, command, or location for "the run record" and no follow-up steps, matching anchor 2 ("Minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute"). It instructs rather than merely describes, so it stays above anchor 1, and lacks any concrete detail that would reach anchor 3. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The word "first" implies a sequence that is never elaborated — every subsequent step and any validation is absent, matching anchor 2 ("Rough sequence present but many gaps; steps poorly defined; validation absent"). The simple-skill exception cannot apply because the single given step itself is ambiguous (which run record, from where?). | 2 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, so there are no nested or buried references and no inlined content that belongs in separate files. However, a single headerless line that points to "the run record" without any path or pointer offers no organization or navigation, fitting anchor 3 ("could be better organized; references present but not clearly signaled") more than the well-organized sections required for anchor 5. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 12 / 20 Passed |