Content
68%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.
Highly actionable with executable code throughout and a clear sequenced workflow, but it loses conciseness and workflow-clarity points due to duplicated reference content and missing validation checkpoints for destructive filtering steps.
Suggestions
Remove the full inline workflow reproduction from the body and point to references/standard_workflow.md instead, keeping only a concise quick-start in SKILL.md to reduce duplication.
Add explicit validation checkpoints after destructive/batch steps (e.g. assert cell/gene counts after filter_cells/filter_genes, verify adata.raw is set before subsetting).
Move the inlined QC block to a brief pointer to scripts/qc_analysis.py to avoid restating what the script already does.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient executable code, but the full standard workflow is duplicated inline while also existing in references/standard_workflow.md, and QC is duplicated between the body and scripts/qc_analysis.py, so it could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Extensive copy-paste-ready executable code, concrete CLI commands (e.g. "python scripts/qc_analysis.py input.h5ad --output filtered.h5ad"), and specific parameter ranges covering the common single-cell cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered 1–7 sequence exists, but filtering cells/genes and subsetting are batch/destructive operations with no explicit validation checkpoint, which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the guidelines. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are clearly signaled and one level deep with easy navigation (Bundled Resources section, inline pointers), but the workflow content is not appropriately split — it is inlined in SKILL.md and duplicated in references/standard_workflow.md. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |