Content
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body has a clear, well-checkpointed workflow but is padded by redundant restatements of that same workflow and abstract framework scaffolding, with no bundle files to offload detail. Tightening the repetition and splitting detailed material into references would raise conciseness and progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Collapse the Scenes, Canonical workflow path, Execution Phases, and Guardrails sections into a single authoritative sequence to remove the ~4x restatement of the same workflow.
Drop or inline-justify the SSL-primitive (READ/REQUEST/COMPARE/...) and Resource-scope (MEMORY/CODEBASE/LOCAL_FS) tables; they are framework jargon that does not add actionable guidance for an ideation skill.
Move the detailed phase/pitfall material into a referenced bundle file (e.g. references/brainstorm-process.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview, improving progressive disclosure now that no bundle files exist.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The same workflow is restated roughly four times (Scenes PREPARE/ACQUIRE/REASON/VERIFY/FINALIZE, the Canonical workflow path block, Execution Phases, and Guardrails), and the SSL-primitive and Resource-scope tables add framework scaffolding that does not earn its tokens; mostly useful but could be tightened, so it is not the lean level-3 anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance exists ("Ask one clarifying question at a time", "Present 2-3 approaches with tradeoffs", "Save the approved design to docs/plans/designs/"), but it is interleaved with abstract framing like "Explore context and frame the design question" and "Infer recommendation", leaving an executable core that is present yet diluted. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The process is clearly sequenced with explicit approval checkpoints ("VERIFY: Get user approval section by section", section-by-section confirmation) and recovery loops ("If the user cannot answer ... propose assumptions", "If user rejects an approach, revise"), matching the clear-sequence-with-validation anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets absent) and the ~140-line body is a single monolithic file; the References section points one level deep to external ../_shared/core/*.md paths that are clearly signaled, but core content that could be split is inline, so it sits at 'some structure but could be better organized' rather than the well-split level-3 anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |