Content
71%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 highly actionable — complete, executable examples for every tool with explicit parameter contracts and sensible operational rules — and the per-operation workflow is clear with real validation guidance. Its weaknesses are repetition (weekday mapping stated three times, nine copies of the SDK wrapper boilerplate) and a bundle-structure gap: six script files exist alongside the skill but are never referenced from it.
Suggestions
State the weekday mapping (0=Monday ... 6=Sunday) exactly once — in the Schedule Types table — and drop the repetitions in the following paragraph and the weekly example's comment.
Show the run_sdk_snippet wrapper pattern once, then present the remaining operations as just the tool.call(...) argument dicts, cutting roughly half of the code-block boilerplate.
Either reference the scripts/ files from the body (e.g. an "Alternative: CLI scripts" section explaining when to prefer them) or remove them from the bundle, so no orphaned content ships with the skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with real information but includes clear tightening opportunities: the weekday mapping ("0=Monday ... 6=Sunday") is stated three times (table, following paragraph, and the weekly example's comment), and the run_sdk_snippet(python_code="""...""") wrapper boilerplate repeats across nine near-identical code blocks. This is more than the minor over-explanation of the level-4 anchor, though it never drifts into explaining concepts Claude already knows. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Every operation (create, list, get, update, delete) ships copy-paste-ready executable code, and the examples cover the common cases — daily, weekly with quoted-string day, long triple-quoted message content, custom employee agent_mode, filtered listing, partial update, and the "pass schedule_type and time together" update contract — with explicit formats for time, day, and deadline. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Operations are clearly sequenced per section with an explicit lifecycle rule ("After scheduled_task_create, keep the returned id; use it for get/update/delete") and validation checkpoints ("Check result.ok before relying on result.content", "Surface tool errors directly; do not silently retry"). It falls short of level 5 because destructive operations (delete, update) lack post-operation verification steps such as re-listing to confirm the change took effect. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section structure within SKILL.md is clean, but scoring against the actual bundle reveals an organization problem: the scripts/ directory contains six files (_context.py, create.py, delete.py, get.py, list.py, update.py) that are never referenced or navigable from the body, leaving ~22KB of bundle content orphaned and duplicating the documented tool.call path. Combined with the thrice-repeated schedule details inlined rather than factored out, the skill could be meaningfully better organized, fitting the level-3 anchor better than the minor-gaps level-4 anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |