Content
67%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 skill is compact, well-sectioned, and mostly concrete, with a sensible workflow that includes a delivery-status checkpoint. Its main defect is that the primary send command is malformed JSON/shell and cannot be executed as written, and constraint details are repeated across three sections.
Suggestions
Fix the Step 2 curl command so the JSON payload is correctly quoted and includes all fields, e.g. -d '{"api":"textbelt","path":"/text","params":{"phone":"<phone_number>","message":"<message_text>"}}' (matching the API's actual payload shape).
State the constraints (800-char limit, no URLs, E.164 for international numbers) once and reference them elsewhere, removing the triple repetition across Step 1, Constraints, and Error Handling.
Add a feedback loop for delivery status: what to do when status returns FAILED (e.g., report the error to the user, check credits/phone format) or remains SENDING.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no concept explanations), but the 800-character and no-URLs limits are repeated across Step 1, Constraints, and Error Handling, and the orphaned sentence "Send SMS messages via the Textbelt API on Orthogonal." sits awkwardly after Setup. Not a 3 because the padding is limited to duplicated constraints rather than unnecessary explanation; not a 5 because the repetition and stray line could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The core send command is malformed: `-d '{"api":"textbelt","path":"/text"}'` closes the JSON before the payload fields, leaving `"phone": ...` lines outside the quoted argument and terminating in a stray `}'`, so it is not executable as written. The setup, status-check, response-field, and error sections are concrete, but the broken primary command is a significant gap beyond the "minor gaps" of a 4. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The gather-info → send → confirm-delivery sequence is clearly ordered, and Step 3 (checking `textId` status) is an explicit validation checkpoint. Not a 5 because there is no feedback loop telling Claude what to do when status is FAILED or persists as SENDING; not a 3 because the sequence and its checkpoint are explicit rather than implicit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a compact single-file skill with no bundle files, where all content (setup, endpoints, response fields, constraints, errors) belongs inline and is organized into clear sections. Minor organization gaps — the misplaced Textbelt intro line and the redundant Constraints section — keep it below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |