Content
60%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 well-structured with a coherent scene-based workflow and clear routing to resource files, but it reads more like a routing specification than an operational skill: concrete executable guidance is thin, and the resource listing is repeated three times. Consolidating references and inlining a minimal worked example of one method would materially improve it.
Suggestions
Consolidate the Dependencies, References-prose, and References-bullet lists into a single deduplicated reference list to remove two redundant enumerations of the same files.
Inline a minimal worked example of one method (e.g., a short ADR template or a two-option design-twice comparison skeleton) so the skill is actionable even before resources/ files are opened.
Make VERIFY operational: replace 'check assumptions, validation steps' with a concrete check (e.g., 'run resources/checklist.md and confirm every recommendation states assumptions, tradeoffs, risks, and validation steps').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly terse and free of explanations of known concepts, but the resource file list is repeated three times (Dependencies, References prose, References bullets), and spec-metadata tables (SSL primitives, Resource scope) add tokens without actionable value. Not anchor 4 because the duplication is a clear, removable inefficiency; not anchor 2 because there is no padded conceptual explanation. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete executable content is limited to two rg commands and a method-selection summary; the actual analytical work ('Use ATAM-style analysis', 'compare at least two genuinely different options') is direction, not steps, and the detailed method content is deferred to resources/ files not present in the bundle. Not anchor 4 because the core instructions lack concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-scene sequence (PREPARE→ACQUIRE→REASON→VERIFY→FINALIZE) with explicit Transitions, a Failure-and-recovery section, and success/partial-success exit criteria; VERIFY acts as a checkpoint. Not anchor 5 because validation is named ('check assumptions, validation steps') rather than operationalized — no concrete verify commands or inline checklist steps. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are clearly signaled and one level deep (resources/*.md plus ../_shared/core/*.md), with the body staying at overview level. Not anchor 5 because the reference list is duplicated across three sections and scheduling metadata (intent signature, SSL primitive table) is inlined where it could live in a resource file; the referenced bundle files are also absent, so the structure cannot be fully verified. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |