Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a well-structured, actionable routing skill: a concrete decision tree, output template, and worked example give clear executable guidance with a clean sequenced workflow. The main weakness is mild token redundancy from the duplicated "Key Questions to Ask" list and the overlapping example/Co-activates sections, which keeps conciseness from the top score.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is largely lean decision-tree bullets with minimal concept explanation, but the "Key Questions to Ask" section duplicates the Process steps and the worked example plus "Co-activates" restate earlier material, tipping it from the lean-and-efficient anchor at 3 to the mostly-efficient-but-could-be-tightened anchor at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives a concrete 5-step decision tree with explicit "Ask" prompts, a copy-ready output format template, and a fully worked example mapping to a specific ODE and equation; the guidance is specific and actionable even though no executable code is included (an instruction/routing skill, which the rubric does not penalize for lacking code). | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The Process is a clearly numbered 5-step sequence each led by an explicit question, with the example tracing the same Q1–Q5 flow to a recommendation; this is a non-destructive routing skill so the destructive-ops validation cap does not apply, matching the clear-sequence anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple single-file skill with no external bundle files, and the content is organized into clearly labeled sections (When to Use, Process, Output Format, Example, Co-activates), which per the rubric's simple-skills note lets progressive disclosure score 3 without external references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |