Content
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A tight, well-structured review workflow with concrete steps, explicit validation gates, and clean one-level reference to another skill for shared detail. No bundle files are present or needed.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean ~35-line body with no re-explanation of concepts Claude knows; every line is directive and earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete directives throughout — 'inspect the PR diff against the PR base', require findings 'with file paths, line numbers, impact, and suggested fix', and 'Post /gemini review'. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Numbered 4-step sequence with an explicit Stop Condition validation gate and feedback loops (re-validate, request another Gemini pass after fixes). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections (Review Gate, Stop Condition) with a single one-level reference to sdev-pass-test for test-weakening details; no nested references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |