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 an exceptionally lean, well-sequenced loop with explicit validation and feedback, but its measure/rebuild steps describe intent rather than giving executable cargo commands. Adding concrete invocations would make it copy-paste actionable.
Suggestions
Add the concrete measurement command, e.g. `cargo bloat --release --crates` (or the flags you standardize on), so step 1 is executable.
Specify the rebuild invocation for step 4, e.g. `cargo build --release`, and note keeping settings identical (e.g. locked `Cargo.lock`, unchanged `--features`).
Show how to capture/compare the before/after size (e.g. `ls -l target/release/fallow` or a recorded baseline) so "size improves" is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Seven terse numbered steps plus one constraint line with no concept explanation or padding; every token earns its place and it assumes Claude's competence. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The sequence and decision rule are concrete ("select one dependency, monomorphization, feature, or codegen contributor"; "keep the change only when size improves and verification passes"), but the core measure/rebuild steps lack executable commands, so it is not copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly numbered loop with an explicit validation gate (step 5: keep only when size improves and verification passes) and a final verification step ("Run `review`"). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references; the content is well-organized into a numbered list and a constraint line, which suffices for a simple skill. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |