Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is lean, fully actionable, and well-organized for a simple single-purpose skill, with copy-paste-ready commands and no unnecessary explanation. Its only gap is the absence of a verification/review step for the batch auto-fix operation.
Suggestions
Add a short validation/review step after 'lint --fix', e.g. review the diff or re-run './frb_internal lint' to confirm no remaining findings before committing.
Briefly note how to interpret common lint/clippy failure output so Claude knows when to stop and fix versus proceed.
Clarify whether 'lint --fix' should be run before or after the dart/rust-specific commands, giving an explicit sequence for the batch operation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and table-driven with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows; the single operational note is relevant rather than padded. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides exact, copy-paste-ready executable commands ('./frb_internal lint --fix', 'lint-dart', 'lint-rust') with descriptions and a recommended default. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The recommended command and breakdown give an unambiguous single action, but the batch auto-fixing 'lint --fix' operation has no validation or verification step for reviewing failures, capping it at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A simple under-50-line skill with clean, well-organized sections (Quick Reference table and a What Lint Includes list) and no nested references; organization is appropriate for its size. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |