Content
77%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-structured, instruction-only skill with an exemplary protocol sequence — explicit checkpoints, a remediation feedback loop, gates, and a completion checklist — and textbook progressive disclosure into three well-signaled reference files. The main drag is token efficiency: book citations, anecdotes, and known-concept exposition recur across sections and could be trimmed without losing actionability.
Suggestions
Trim the anecdotes and attributed quotes (QR code case, Steve Jobs/Whitney Hess citations, flashlight story) from Protocolo and Heuristicas — keep the derived rule, drop the motivational narrative Claude doesn't need to execute.
Remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows, e.g., the qualitative-vs-quantitative exposition in step 2 ('Quantitativo dá o o quê... qualitativo dá o por quê'); the method-selection table already conveys the decision rule.
Consolidate the repeated provenance citations (Fabricio Teixeira book is referenced in the intro, Protocolo, and Heuristicas) into the single 'Fonte' section at the end.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient actionable guidance, but several sections pad with material Claude does not need to execute: repeated book citations and quotes (Whitney Hess, Steve Jobs), anecdotes (the QR code case, the flashlight/basement story), and exposition of concepts Claude already knows (qualitative gives the 'why', quantitative the 'what'). This fits anchor 3 (mostly efficient with some unnecessary explanation that could be tightened) better than 4, as the over-explanation recurs across the Protocolo and Heuristicas sections. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill the guidance is concrete and executable: a question-to-method selection table, specific numbers ("teste com 3-5 usuários", "3-7 bullets", "5+ sessões" triggers the thematic pipeline), and concrete recruiting/environment/posture rules. It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because some steps remain high-level pointers into the references (e.g., step 5 'conforme o pedido') rather than fully specified guidance. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A numbered six-step protocol (definir problema → escolher método → conduzir → sintetizar → produzir artefato → gates + handoff) with an explicit source-tracing checkpoint that includes an error-recovery loop ("reescrever ou remover a afirmação antes de entregar"), integrity and anti-AI gates in step 6, and a completion checklist in 'Evidencia de Conclusao'. This matches anchor 5's explicit validation, feedback loops, and checklists; the destructive/batch cap does not apply since research synthesis is neither. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The ~160-line body is a genuine overview with three real, correctly-pathed reference files, each given a one-line content description in a dedicated 'Referencias (carregar sob demanda)' section plus a load rule ('Carregar apenas a referência que o entregável pedido exige'). References are one level deep with no nested pointers, matching anchor 5's clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |