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, executable, and well-organized, scoring top marks on conciseness, actionability, and progressive disclosure. Its only gap is workflow clarity: destructive 'remove code' recommendations lack validation/verification checkpoints, capping that dimension at 2.
Suggestions
Add an explicit verification checkpoint before recommending removal — e.g., 'Re-run the caller search after deleting to confirm nothing breaks, and run the test suite / cargo check' — so the destructive workflow has a validate-then-act feedback loop.
In the Output format, add a step 6 'Verification' requiring confirmation that the build/tests still pass after any removal, which would lift workflow_clarity to 3.
Mark the 'One caller → Candidate for inlining' row with a note to re-check transitive usage (re-exports, trait impls) before inlining, since the body already warns these can hide live callers.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — 'Pick whichever techniques below are useful -- you don't need all of them' — with no padding explaining what git or grep is; every technique is a tight command plus one heuristic. Not level 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation to tighten. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands such as 'grep -rn \'symbol\' --include=\'*.rs\'', 'git log --all --oneline --diff-filter=A -S \'symbol\'', and 'git blame path/to/file.rs -L 100,120', plus a complete command reference block. Not level 2 because there is no pseudocode or missing key detail. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The decision-framework table and numbered output format give a clear sequence, but the skill recommends destructive actions ('Remove with its tests', 'Remove both') without any validation checkpoint (e.g., re-grep to confirm zero callers, run tests, or verify the build after removal); per the rubric, missing validation in destructive workflows caps this at 2. Not level 3 because explicit verification steps are absent; not level 1 because the sequence and evidence-to-verdict mapping are clearly present. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a self-contained ~50-line document with no external references and clean organization into Techniques, Decision framework, Output format, and Git commands reference, satisfying the simple-skill allowance for a top score on well-organized sections alone. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |