Content
78%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 concise, well-structured simple skill body with a clear workflow and good organization. The main gap is actionability: it names the tool family but gives no concrete executable commands or examples.
Suggestions
Add one concrete example invocation (e.g. a Playwright snippet or command) for the common case to lift actionability.
Specify how to surface console/network failures (e.g. capture browser console logs) so the checking step is executable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no concept over-explanation; every line ('Use Playwright/browser tooling for web-facing checks', the Good fits list, the numbered workflow) earns its place and assumes Claude's competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps are concrete and ordered (open URL, inspect structure, capture screenshots, check console errors, report issues with page/path context) but lack specific executable commands or tool invocations beyond the generic 'Playwright/browser tooling' mention. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear five-step sequence with a checking step (console errors/network failures); minor validation gaps remain, though this non-destructive review skill does not trigger the destructive/batch feedback-loop cap. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well under 50 lines with no need for external references and cleanly organized into 'Good fits' and 'Workflow' sections, satisfying the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |