Content
93%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 tight, highly actionable RCA framework built around executable ES|QL queries and a clear numbered investigation sequence, with no wasted tokens and well-organized self-contained structure. The one gap is the absence of an explicit validation step confirming the root-cause hypothesis before moving to documentation.
Suggestions
Add an explicit hypothesis-validation checkpoint between Correlation Analysis and Resolution Documentation (e.g., 'Confirm the candidate root cause against at least two independent signals before documenting it').
Optionally note how to handle queries that return no results or ambiguous signals, giving a light feedback loop for dead-end investigation paths.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean: numbered section headers plus executable ES|QL commands and a compact table, with only brief contextual intros that earn their place and no explaining of concepts Claude already knows. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready ES|QL queries covering scope, timeline, correlation (traces/CPU/network), and deploy-change detection; the only placeholders (<affected-service>, <service>) are explicitly justified by incident-dependent values. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear, well-numbered 5-step investigation sequence (assess scope → timeline → correlation → root causes → documentation) with most structure present, but it lacks an explicit hypothesis-verification checkpoint to confirm a candidate root cause before documenting it. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A self-contained, single-purpose skill with no need for external references, organized into five clearly numbered sections with easy navigation, matching the simple-skill exception for well-organized content. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |