Content
85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews 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, highly actionable diagnostic procedure with clear sequencing and good organization; its only weakness is moderate verbosity in the qualifying prose of a few steps. Trimming the long parentheticals and the embedded issue example would improve token efficiency.
Suggestions
Tighten the extended parentheticals in steps 6 and 7; move the 'fix stage runs/defers' rules into the fix-approach descriptions rather than repeating them as caveats.
Shorten or extract the issue #1178 worked example so the main procedure stays scannable while retaining the concrete illustration.
Consider moving the 'obvious culprits' checklist toward a bundled reference if more patterns accrue, keeping the main body lean.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | It assumes Claude's competence and explains no basic concepts, but several qualifying passages (the extended step-6 and step-7 parentheticals, the long issue-#1178 example) could be tightened to earn every token. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete per-symptom sub-procedures, a specific 'obvious culprits' checklist with real patterns (missing locale filter, missing await, module-scope t()), and a worked output example, all directly actionable for an instruction-only skill. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 9-step numbered sequence anchored on prior-stage output, with explicit gates ('If you cannot get below file-level... search more') and a defined output schema; read-only scope means destructive-validation loops are not applicable. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single self-contained, well-sectioned SKILL.md (Hard prohibitions, Procedure, Output) with no external references needed, which the rubric allows to score 3 for compact, clearly organized skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |