Content
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill attempts to be comprehensive but suffers from significant verbosity, embedding extensive business theory (MVP philosophy, monetization models, AARRR metrics, product-market fit phases) that Claude already understands and that belongs in reference documents rather than the main skill file. The actionable elements (ambiguity formula, prioritization matrix, vertical slice examples, acceptance criteria format) are solid but buried in explanatory text. The workflow exists but is fragmented across sections rather than presented as a clear sequential process.
Suggestions
Extract the entire 'Fundamento de Negócio' section (sections 1-6) into docs/skill-guides/po-feature-spec.md and replace with a 3-5 line summary linking to it — this alone would cut ~50% of the content.
Add a concrete feature spec template (markdown skeleton with placeholders) that Claude can copy and fill in, rather than describing what the spec should contain in prose.
Consolidate the workflow into a single numbered sequence at the top: 1. Calculate ambiguity score → 2. Interview/Enrich if needed → 3. Validate business hypothesis → 4. Write spec using template → 5. Handoff to UI/UX, with clear go/no-go gates.
Remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows (what MVP means, problem vs. solution distinction, Maslow's hierarchy, what AARRR stands for) and keep only the project-specific rules and thresholds.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. It explains concepts Claude already knows (what a problem vs. necessity is, Maslow's pyramid, what MVP means, basic prioritization matrices). The 'Fundamento de Negócio' section alone is a wall of business theory that could be condensed to a fraction. Multiple sections restate obvious PO knowledge. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides some concrete guidance like the ambiguity score formula, prioritization matrix, DADO/QUANDO/ENTÃO format for acceptance criteria, and vertical slice examples. However, most content is descriptive rather than executable — there are no code snippets, no template structures to fill in, and the spec output format is described abstractly rather than given as a concrete template. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is an implicit workflow (ambiguity scoring → deep interview/enrich → discovery validation → spec writing → handoff to UI/UX), but it's scattered across sections rather than presented as a clear sequential process. The ambiguity scoring thresholds and deep interview protocol provide some checkpoints, but there's no unified step-by-step workflow with explicit validation gates between phases. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references several external files (docs/skill-guides/po-feature-spec.md, policies/vertical-slices.md, templates/deep-interview.md, docs/skill-guides/ideation-frameworks.md) which is good progressive disclosure practice. However, the main file itself contains too much inline content that should be in those referenced files — the entire 'Fundamento de Negócio' section with its 6 subsections is a prime candidate for extraction. No bundle files were provided to verify references exist. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |