Content
92%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is lean, highly actionable, and well-sequenced with explicit validation, reflecting strong domain expertise. The main weakness is progressive disclosure: a large inline symptom-checklist could be split into a reference file for easier navigation.
Suggestions
Move the lengthy Symptom Checks section into a referenced file (e.g. references/symptom-checks.md) and keep a brief pointer in SKILL.md so the overview stays scannable.
Add an explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loop in the Workflow (e.g. 'if validation fails, refine the minimal change and re-validate') to make error recovery unmistakable.
Consider extracting the Issue Report File section's section-list template into a bundled template file under references/ so the report structure is reusable and discoverable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with domain-specific guidance (directive names, specific checks) and assumes Claude's competence without explaining concepts like what Caddy is, so every section earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete commands (`caddy list-modules --versions | grep -E "(auth|security)"`), exact file-naming patterns, specific headers, and named directives to inspect, giving copy-ready executable guidance for an instruction-based skill. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 8-step Workflow is clearly sequenced with an explicit validation checkpoint (step 6 'Validate with the narrowest available command') and Symptom Checks act as a checklist, satisfying the anchor for clear sequence with validation. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The file is well-sectioned but monolithic: the long Symptom Checks block is inline content that could live in a separate reference, and no bundle files or one-level-deep references are used for navigation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |