Content
78%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.
The content is well-structured, concise, and actionable for an instruction-only classification skill, with a clear output schema and a useful validation checkpoint. Its main gap is the absence of worked examples that would anchor the classification criteria.
Suggestions
Add 2-3 worked examples showing a sample issue and the expected JSON classification output to lift actionability to fully concrete.
Make the workflow sequence explicit (e.g. a short numbered list: read title/body, apply definitions, verify intent if OK, emit JSON) even though the task is simple.
Tighten the 'comment' field description by separating the required opening phrase from the variable missing-details guidance to reduce verbosity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and task-specific, defining classification criteria and edge cases rather than padding with concepts Claude already knows; the only minor trim is the verbose comment-template instruction, fitting the 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives a concrete JSON output schema with an exact enum and a specific comment template plus explicit edge-case rules (prompt injection -> SPAM), but it lacks worked examples mapping a real issue to a classification, leaving it just short of fully concrete. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | As a simple single-task classification skill it has an unambiguous action (analyze, classify, emit JSON) plus one validation checkpoint (verify user intent before classifying OK), but the sequence is implicit and there is no feedback loop, matching the 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references and is organized into clear sections (Instructions, Verification of User Intent, JSON Output Format, Quality Definitions), which per the guideline lets progressive disclosure score 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |