Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A thorough, highly actionable review workflow with a clear step sequence and an explicit validation gate, grounded in project-specific conventions Claude would not otherwise know. Its main weaknesses are length (some restated general principles and a long diagram template) and a monolithic single-file structure where the heuristic reference could be split out.
Suggestions
Move the H1–H16 heuristic list into a separate references file (e.g. HEURISTICS.md) and keep SKILL.md as a lean overview that links to it, improving progressive disclosure and trimming the inline token load.
Tighten heuristics that restate widely-known principles (H1 single-responsibility, H7 Flow-vs-suspend, H12 Result<T>) to one-line checklist prompts, retaining only the project-specific bad/good examples that add non-obvious value.
Condense the Step 3 box-diagram template to a compact schematic plus the key 'do not invent a browser-impl box' note, since the full ASCII template consumes significant space for a single illustrative purpose.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient and free of generic concept lectures, but at ~220 lines it includes a lengthy box-diagram template and several heuristics that restate widely-known principles (H1 single-responsibility, H7 Flow-vs-suspend, H12 Result<T>); it could be tightened, matching the 'mostly efficient but could be tighter' anchor rather than 'every token earns its place'. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance throughout — Asana fetch with specific opt_fields, bad/good method-signature pairs for each heuristic, explicit module-placement rules, and a copy-ready three-tier feedback structure — fully actionable rather than descriptive. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear seven-step sequence with an explicit validation gate in Step 2 ('Do not proceed… with unresolved module locations', stop-and-ask the user) plus a structure table and a 16-item heuristic checklist; this is a read-only review so the destructive/batch feedback-loop cap does not apply. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized, but with no bundle files the entire 220-line body — including the H1–H16 reference list that could stand alone — lives inline in SKILL.md, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor rather than the split-and-referenced level-3 pattern. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |