Content
86%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 efficient, actionable, well-sequenced instruction set: it classifies the target into adapter/composable/component test types with concrete templates, a file-naming convention, and an exact test-run command. The only notable gaps are placeholder-laden templates and the absence of an explicit fix-on-failure loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and instruction-only — "Analyze the file to understand what to test", "Create the test in __tests__/OriginalName.spec.ts", "Run: npx vitest run --reporter=verbose" — with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance is present (exact run command, naming convention, code templates per test type), but the templates use xxx placeholders and the Composable block is only imports plus a vi.mock line with no actual test body, so it falls at 'mostly executable; concrete code or commands with minor gaps' rather than copy-paste ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 4-step sequence (analyze → determine type → create test → run) ends with a verification step (running vitest), and since test creation is non-destructive the validation cap does not apply; it stops short of a 5 because there is no fix-and-rerun feedback loop for failing tests. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple, single-purpose skill (~54-line body) with no need for external reference files; the ## Steps section with ### per-type subsections is well-organized and fully self-contained, which per the simple-skill scoring note earns the top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |