Content
92%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.
The body is an exemplary lean process skill: a tight numbered workflow with project-specific rationale, concrete file paths and taxonomies, and a built-in validation loop. The only weakness is mild vagueness in the framing steps (defining the corpus, the final 'review' command).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a lean eight-step list with no padding; the two rationale sentences ('A bare run can report a very different result set'; 'A verdict that lives only in a session or in `.plans/` is lost...') convey non-obvious, project-specific facts Claude could not know, so every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is mostly concrete and executable for an instruction-only skill: exact adjudication path 'tests/conformance/adjudications.json', the TP/FP/FN/model-difference taxonomy, and 'run each comparison tool as the project's CI or package.json script runs it, with the same flags and preprocessors'. Minor gaps remain — step 1 ('Define the capability and stable project corpus') and step 8 ('Run review') give no pointer to how. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The eight steps are clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates: verify disagreements against source (step 3), record the classification before fixing (step 5), ship the correction with a regression fixture (step 6), and re-run the full corpus retaining 'only net improvements' (step 7) — a feedback loop that discards regressions, satisfying the batch-operation validation requirement. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, and needs no external references (none exist in the bundle); the single well-organized numbered list fully qualifies for the simple-skill exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |