Content
88%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 well-crafted, dense body that leads with domain judgment Claude would not derive on its own (break-even ROAS from margin, backend as revenue source of truth, offline value for lead gen), backed by concrete formulas, tables, an explicit reconciliation feedback loop, and checklists. The main improvements are removing the Handoff/Pipeline-Integration redundancy and tightening the relationship between the inline content and the referenced guide.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what GA4, ROAS, or UTM are, and jumps straight to domain judgment ("`generate_lead` nao e receita"). Minor trimmable instances exist: the Handoff and Integracao com Pipeline sections restate the same sibling-skill relationships (skills 21, 55, 03, 06, 05 in both), and the ROAS-2.0-destroys-value point appears in the intro and again in section 4. This fits anchor 4 ("Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed") rather than anchor 3, since these are repetitions rather than unnecessary explanations. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill, the guidance is fully concrete: exact formulas ("Margem de contribuicao = (Receita − custos variaveis antes da midia) / Receita", "Break-even ROAS = 1 / Margem de contribuicao"), per-funnel event contracts ("view_item → add_to_cart → begin_checkout → purchase"), an ID table with do/don't columns, a divergence-to-cause table, and a decision table for bidding strategy by situation. Specific examples cover the two common cases (e-commerce and lead gen), matching anchor 5's "specific examples cover the common cases" for instruction guidance. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sequencing is explicit ("A ordem correta e plano → contrato de evento → tag"), section 3 contains a full validation feedback loop with a gate ("identificar a causa provavel → corrigir a fonte especifica → rodar a reconciliacao de novo... So liberar escala quando a divergencia cair dentro da tolerancia declarada"), and checklists for the complex process are present ("Duplicidade testada (refresh, back-button, retry de pagamento)"). This matches anchor 5 ("explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery; checklists") rather than anchor 4, which allows minor validation gaps — the budget-scaling decision is explicitly gated on the reconciliation loop. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Structure is good with clear section headers, tables, and a single clearly-signaled one-level-deep reference for details ("consultar `docs/skill-guides/closed-loop-revenue.md` apenas quando necessario"); no nested references exist. Not anchor 5 because the body runs ~250 lines with some inline content that the guide reference suggests could live there (full event contracts), plus organizational redundancy between the Handoff and Integracao com Pipeline sections, and the referenced guide file is not part of this bundle so the split cannot be verified — matching anchor 4 ("Good structure; most content appropriately placed; references mostly clear; minor organization gaps") over anchor 3, since nothing that clearly belongs in a separate file is bulk-inlined. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |